Court Opinion

ID: 6326616
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-03-24 18:00:24.364766+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:22:14.435004
License: Public Domain

Case: 21-40567     Document: 00516252349         Page: 1     Date Filed: 03/24/2022

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

                                                                          FILED
                                  No. 21-40567                      March 24, 2022
                                Summary Calendar                     Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                          Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                             Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   John Randall Epperson,

                                                         Defendant—Appellant.

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                       for the Eastern District of Texas
                           USDC No. 4:20-CR-188-1

   Before King, Costa, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent John Randall
   Epperson 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). Epperson has not filed a response. We have

          *
            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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 21-40567     Document: 00516252349           Page: 2   Date Filed: 03/24/2022

                                    No. 21-40567

   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.
          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