Court Opinion

ID: 4150275
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2017-03-04 01:00:47.994475+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:46:30.309516
License: Public Domain

Case: 15-11184      Document: 00513896918         Page: 1    Date Filed: 03/03/2017

           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                                                                             United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                      Fifth Circuit
                                    No. 15-11184                                    FILED
                                  Summary Calendar                              March 3, 2017
                                                                               Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                    Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

SELENA BALL,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Northern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 3:14-CR-451-9

Before JONES, WIENER, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Selena Ball has moved for leave to
withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011).
Ball has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us
to make a fair evaluation of Ball’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; we

       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
    Case: 15-11184    Document: 00513896918     Page: 2   Date Filed: 03/03/2017

                                 No. 15-11184

therefore decline to consider the claim without prejudice to collateral review.
See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014).
      We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant parts of the record
reflected therein, as well as Ball’s response.     We concur with counsel’s
assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review.
Accordingly, the 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.

                                       2