Court Opinion

ID: 6496610
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-06-30 00:00:35.204336+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:54:26.103134
License: Public Domain

Case: 21-11223     Document: 00516376495         Page: 1     Date Filed: 06/29/2022

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

                                                                           FILED
                                                                       June 29, 2022
                                  No. 21-11223                        Lyle W. Cayce
                                Summary Calendar                           Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                             Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Keith Dion Washington,

                                                         Defendant—Appellant.

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Northern District of Texas
                            USDC No. 3:17-CR-12-8

   Before Wiener, Dennis, and Haynes, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          The attorney appointed to represent Keith Dion Washington 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). Washington has not filed a response. We have reviewed

          *
            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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 21-11223     Document: 00516376495          Page: 2   Date Filed: 06/29/2022

                                   No. 21-11223

   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. 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