Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
William Lee Perry appealed from a criminal proceeding in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. His appointed appellate attorney moved to withdraw and submitted a brief under Anders v. California and United States v. Flores, representing that the appeal presented no nonfrivolous ground for review.
Perry did not file a response to counsel’s motion or Anders brief. The Fifth Circuit independently reviewed counsel’s submission and the relevant portions of the appellate record.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth Circuit agreed with appointed counsel that Perry’s appeal presented no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review.
The court therefore granted counsel’s motion to withdraw, excused counsel from further responsibilities in the matter, and dismissed the appeal under Fifth Circuit Rule 42.2.
Key Takeaways
- An appointed attorney who concludes that a criminal appeal lacks a nonfrivolous issue may seek withdrawal through the Anders procedure.
- The appellate court independently reviewed the brief and relevant record before agreeing with counsel’s assessment.
- Because the court found no nonfrivolous appellate issue, it permitted counsel to withdraw and dismissed Perry’s appeal.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the Fifth Circuit’s handling of an Anders appeal: appointed counsel may withdraw only after identifying the appeal as frivolous and allowing the court to conduct its own review. Here, that review produced no issue warranting merits briefing or further appellate proceedings.