Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
John Melgar appealed from a criminal case in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. The Fifth Circuit’s unpublished opinion does not describe his conviction, sentence, or the substantive issues he sought to raise.
Melgar’s appointed attorney moved to withdraw and filed a brief under Anders v. California, indicating that counsel found no nonfrivolous basis for the appeal. Melgar did not respond. The Fifth Circuit reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record identified in it.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth Circuit held that the appeal’s untimeliness was dispositive because the government declined to waive the issue. The court therefore dismissed the appeal under Fifth Circuit Rule 42.2.
The court also granted appointed counsel’s motion to withdraw and excused counsel from further responsibilities in the case. The per curiam disposition did not reach the merits of any potential appellate claims.
Key Takeaways
- An untimely criminal appeal may be dismissed when the government declines to waive the filing deadline.
- The Fifth Circuit treated timeliness as dispositive and did not address the merits of the potential issues identified through the Anders procedure.
- The court granted appointed counsel leave to withdraw and dismissed the appeal under Fifth Circuit Rule 42.2.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores the practical importance of timely filing a criminal notice of appeal. Even where appointed counsel follows the Anders process, an unwaived timeliness defect can end the appeal without merits review.