Court Opinion

ID: 9907624
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-06 19:01:12.578895+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:58:16.918129
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-50252         Document: 00516991768             Page: 1      Date Filed: 12/06/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________
                                                                                United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit
                                       No. 23-50252
                                     Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                     ____________                               December 6, 2023
                                                                                  Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                           Clerk

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Ethan Eli Tinney,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                           for the Western District of Texas
                                USDC No. 6:21-CR-49-1
                      ______________________________

   Before King, Haynes, and Graves, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          The attorney appointed to represent Ethan Eli Tinney 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).
   Tinney has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow
   us to make a fair evaluation of Tinney’s claims of ineffective assistance of

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-50252      Document: 00516991768           Page: 2    Date Filed: 12/06/2023

                                     No. 23-50252

   counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claims 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 Tinney’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.
          We note, however, that the district court was without jurisdiction to
   amend the judgment during the pendency of this appeal. See United States
   v. Lucero, 755 F. App’x 384, 386-87 (5th Cir. 2018); see also United States v.
   Willis, 76 F.4th 467, 471-72 (5th Cir. 2023) (citing Lucero). Thus, the original
   judgment stands. We treat the district court’s April 13, 2023, amended
   judgment as an indicative ruling. The amended judgment is VACATED for
   want of jurisdiction, and the case is REMANDED for the limited purpose
   of re-entry of the amended judgment.

                                          2