Court Opinion

ID: 4146983
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2017-02-22 01:01:13.290974+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:46:27.352686
License: Public Domain

Case: 16-11077      Document: 00513882344         Page: 1    Date Filed: 02/21/2017

           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                                    No. 16-11077
                                 Conference Calendar
                                                                         United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                  Fifth Circuit

                                                                                FILED
                                                                         February 21, 2017
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                                                                           Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk
                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JERRY WARE,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Northern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 3:15-CR-40-2

Before JOLLY, PRADO, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Jerry Ware 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). Ware
has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to
make a fair evaluation of Ware’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; we

       * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH
CIR. R. 47.5.4.
    Case: 16-11077    Document: 00513882344     Page: 2   Date Filed: 02/21/2017

                                 No. 16-11077

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 parts of the record
reflected therein, as well as Ware’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.

                                       2