Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Martel Devante Gilliam appealed from a criminal case in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. His appointed appellate attorney moved for leave to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011).
Gilliam did not file a response to counsel’s motion or brief. The Fifth Circuit reviewed counsel’s submission and the relevant portions of the appellate record identified in it.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth Circuit agreed with appointed counsel that Gilliam’s appeal presented no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. The court therefore granted counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw and excused counsel from further responsibilities in the case.
The court dismissed the appeal under Fifth Circuit Rule 42.2. The per curiam opinion was issued on the summary calendar and was not designated for publication.
Key Takeaways
- An appointed attorney may seek to withdraw by filing an Anders brief when counsel concludes that an appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue.
- The appellate court independently reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record before agreeing with counsel’s assessment.
- Because the court found no nonfrivolous appellate issue, it granted withdrawal and dismissed the appeal under Fifth Circuit Rule 42.2.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the Fifth Circuit’s procedure for resolving a criminal appeal after appointed counsel files an Anders brief. Counsel’s assessment alone did not end the case; the panel reviewed the submission and pertinent record before permitting withdrawal and dismissing the appeal.