Court Opinion

ID: 4995317
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2021-09-28 18:03:17.184512+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:02:09.566640
License: Public Domain

Case: 21-10307      Document: 00516032608         Page: 1     Date Filed: 09/28/2021

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit                                  United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                   Fifth Circuit

                                                                                 FILED
                                                                        September 28, 2021
                                  No. 21-10307                              Lyle W. Cayce
                                Summary Calendar                                 Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                              Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Melissa Sue Batten,

                                                           Defendant—Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                       for the Northern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 1:20-CR-65-2

   Before Wiener, Dennis, and Haynes, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Melissa Sue
   Batten 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). Batten has filed a response. The record is not

          *
            Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 21-10307      Document: 00516032608           Page: 2   Date Filed: 09/28/2021

                                     No. 21-10307

   sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Batten’s claim
   of ineffective assistance of counsel; we 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 portions of the
   record reflected therein, as well as Batten’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