Court Opinion

ID: 50711
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-26 00:56:25+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:39:16.164608
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                                                                Fifth Circuit
                                                             F I L E D
               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                  June 20, 2007

                                                          Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                  Clerk
                            No. 06-10876
                        Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                    Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ROY G. DRISCOLL,

                                    Defendant-Appellant.

                      --------------------
          Appeal from the United States District Court
               for the Northern District of Texas
                    USDC No. 3:05-CR-164-ALL
                      --------------------

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Roy G.

Driscoll has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in

accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).

Driscoll has filed a response.   The record is insufficiently

developed to allow consideration at this time of Driscoll’s

claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.   See United States

v. Cantwell, 470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir. 2006).   Our

independent review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Driscoll’s

response discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal.

     *
       Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
                           No. 06-10876
                                -2-

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED,

counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the

APPEAL IS DISMISSED.   See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.