Court Opinion

ID: 4688011
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2021-05-19 00:00:34.014772+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:04:45.226655
License: Public Domain

Case: 20-10950     Document: 00515867065         Page: 1     Date Filed: 05/18/2021

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

                                                                       FILED
                                                                   May 18, 2021
                                  No. 20-10950                    Lyle W. Cayce
                               Conference Calendar                     Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                             Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Carrington Marshall Thomas,

                                                         Defendant—Appellant.

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Northern District of Texas
                           USDC No. 4:20-CR-90-1

   Before King, Southwick, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          The attorney appointed to represent Carrington Marshall Thomas 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). Thomas has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s

          *
            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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 20-10950     Document: 00515867065         Page: 2   Date Filed: 05/18/2021

                                  No. 20-10950

   brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as
   Thomas’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