Court Opinion

ID: 6327099
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-03-26 00:00:23.680832+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:22:20.395662
License: Public Domain

Case: 21-50681      Document: 00516255124         Page: 1     Date Filed: 03/25/2022

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

                                                                          FILED
                                                                    March 25, 2022
                                  No. 21-50681                       Lyle W. Cayce
                                Summary Calendar                          Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                              Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Brenda Leigh Kirk,

                                                           Defendant—Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Western District of Texas
                            USDC No. 7:20-CR-243-1

   Before Higginbotham, Higginson, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          The attorney appointed to represent Brenda Leigh Kirk 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).
   Kirk has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the

          *
            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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 21-50681     Document: 00516255124         Page: 2   Date Filed: 03/25/2022

                                  No. 21-50681

   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