Court Opinion

ID: 4641304
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2020-12-10 01:00:21.087468+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:47:43.899030
License: Public Domain

Case: 20-10127      Document: 00515668240         Page: 1     Date Filed: 12/09/2020

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

                                                                               FILED
                                                                        December 9, 2020
                                  No. 20-10127                            Lyle W. Cayce
                               Conference Calendar                             Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                              Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Dawn Greenwood,

                                                           Defendant—Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                       for the Northern District of Texas
                            USDC No. 3:19-CR-262-2

   Before King, Southwick, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          The attorney appointed to represent Dawn Greenwood 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).
   Greenwood has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and

          *
            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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 20-10127     Document: 00515668240          Page: 2   Date Filed: 12/09/2020

                                   No. 20-10127

   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. Greenwood’s pro
   se motion for appointment of substitute counsel is DENIED as untimely.
   See United States v. Wagner, 158 F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir. 1998).

                                         2