Court Opinion

ID: 8375019
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-10-21 00:00:32.138736+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:46:27.302859
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-20213      Document: 00516515776         Page: 1    Date Filed: 10/20/2022

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

                                                                           FILED
                                  No. 22-20213                       October 20, 2022
                                Summary Calendar
                                                                      Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                           Clerk
   United States of America,

                                                             Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Prince Albert Edward,

                                                          Defendant—Appellant.

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Southern District of Texas
                            USDC No. 4:21-CR-55-1

   Before Jones, Haynes, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          The attorney appointed to represent Prince Albert Edward 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). Edwards 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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 22-20213     Document: 00516515776          Page: 2   Date Filed: 10/20/2022

                                   No. 22-20213

   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