Court Opinion

ID: 8407359
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-02 00:00:26.804257+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:47:26.810597
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-30076     Document: 00516530249         Page: 1     Date Filed: 11/01/2022

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

                                                                       FILED
                                                                November 1, 2022
                                  No. 22-30076
                                Summary Calendar                  Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                       Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                             Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Brittany Monroe Knapp,

                                                         Defendant—Appellant.

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Middle District of Louisiana
                            USDC No. 3:20-CR-80-1

   Before Higginbotham, Graves, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          The attorney appointed to represent Brittany Monroe Knapp 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). Knapp has not 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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 22-30076     Document: 00516530249          Page: 2   Date Filed: 11/01/2022

                                   No. 22-30076

   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