Court Opinion

ID: 5135771
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2021-12-17 01:00:24.470729+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:16:58.179386
License: Public Domain

Case: 21-20299     Document: 00516134972         Page: 1     Date Filed: 12/16/2021

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

                                                                            FILED
                                                                    December 16, 2021
                                  No. 21-20299
                                Summary Calendar                       Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                            Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                             Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   James Allen Baimbridge,

                                                         Defendant—Appellant.

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Southern District of Texas
                           USDC No. 4:20-CR-622-1

   Before Smith, Stewart, and Graves, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent James Allen
   Baimbridge 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). Baimbridge has filed a response. The

          *
            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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 21-20299      Document: 00516134972          Page: 2   Date Filed: 12/16/2021

                                    No. 21-20299

   record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of
   Baimbridge’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 Baimbridge’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