Court Opinion

ID: 2805732
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-06-04 18:01:15.875682+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:05:07.727091
License: Public Domain

Case: 14-40789      Document: 00513066735         Page: 1    Date Filed: 06/04/2015

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

                                    No. 14-40789                                   FILED
                                  Summary Calendar                              June 4, 2015
                                                                              Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                   Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

SHANNON GUESS RICHARDSON,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Eastern District of Texas
                              USDC No. 5:13-CR-13

Before DAVIS, CLEMENT, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Shannon Guess Richardson 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). Richardson has not filed a response. Counsel also moves to seal
the record excerpts on appeal because they contain documents that were sealed
in the district court.

       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 14-40789      Document: 00513066735      Page: 2   Date Filed: 06/04/2015

                                  No. 14-40789

      The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair
evaluation of any claims of ineffective assistance of counsel which Richardson
wishes to raise; we therefore decline to consider any such claims without
prejudice to collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841
(5th Cir.), cert. denied, 135 S. Ct. 123 (2014).
      We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record
reflected therein.   We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal
presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Counsel’s motions to seal
the record excerpts and for leave to withdraw are GRANTED, counsel is
excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED.
See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

                                         2