Court Opinion

ID: 4090505
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-10-19 00:01:28.813842+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:13:07.776808
License: Public Domain

Case: 15-11012      Document: 00513722141         Page: 1    Date Filed: 10/18/2016

           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                                    No. 15-11012
                                 Conference Calendar
                                                                         United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                  Fifth Circuit

                                                                                FILED
                                                                         October 18, 2016
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                                                                           Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk
                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

FRANKLIN BELL,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Northern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 4:15-CR-21-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Franklin Bell 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). Bell
has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to
make a fair evaluation of Bell’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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 15-11012    Document: 00513722141     Page: 2   Date Filed: 10/18/2016

                                 No. 15-11012

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 portions of the record
reflected therein, as well as Bell’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