Court Opinion

ID: 4362908
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2019-01-30 01:00:52.791845+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:17:54.695097
License: Public Domain

Case: 18-10648      Document: 00514813522         Page: 1    Date Filed: 01/29/2019

           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                                                                      United States Court of Appeals

                                    No. 18-10648
                                                                               Fifth Circuit

                                                                             FILED
                                 Conference Calendar                  January 29, 2019
                                                                        Lyle W. Cayce
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                                                    Clerk

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

KENTRELL DAVIS, also known as “Zeal”,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Northern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 4:17-CR-264-9

Before DAVIS, JONES, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Kentrell Davis 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).
Davis has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us
to make a fair evaluation of Davis’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel;

       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 18-10648    Document: 00514813522    Page: 2   Date Filed: 01/29/2019

                                No. 18-10648

we therefore decline to consider the claims 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 Davis’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. Davis’s motion for the appointment of new counsel is
DENIED.

                                      2