Court Opinion

ID: 4405146
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2019-06-10 18:00:19.548046+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:24:45.002968
License: Public Domain

Case: 18-11208      Document: 00514989328         Page: 1    Date Filed: 06/10/2019

           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                                                                   United States Court of Appeals
                                                                            Fifth Circuit

                                    No. 18-11208                          FILED
                                 Conference Calendar                  June 10, 2019
                                                                     Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                          Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

BRYSON DEONTAE BRIGHT,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Northern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 3:17-CR-567-8

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

       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 18-11208    Document: 00514989328     Page: 2   Date Filed: 06/10/2019

                                 No. 18-11208

of counsel; 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 Bright’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