Court Opinion

ID: 4384273
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2019-04-04 18:00:15.685815+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:30:21.405981
License: Public Domain

Case: 18-10676      Document: 00514902320         Page: 1    Date Filed: 04/04/2019

           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                                                                      United States Court of Appeals
                                                                               Fifth Circuit

                                    No. 18-10676                             FILED
                                 Conference Calendar                      April 4, 2019
                                                                        Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                             Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

KIMBERLY RENEE BANKSTON,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Northern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 4:17-CR-197-6

Before DAVIS, JONES, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Kimberly Renee Bankston 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). Bankston has filed a response that includes a request to have
counsel provide her with record copies and for an extension of time so that she

       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 18-10676      Document: 00514902320   Page: 2   Date Filed: 04/04/2019

                                 No. 18-10676

may assist counsel in preparing her appeal. Alternatively, she moves for the
appointment of new counsel. Bankston’s pro se motions are DENIED.
      We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record
reflected therein, as well as Bankston’s response. We concur with counsel’s
assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review.
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.

                                       2