Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Serbelio Tepaz-Perez appealed from a criminal case in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. The Fifth Circuit considered the matter on its summary calendar.
Tepaz-Perez’s appointed 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), representing that the appeal presented no nonfrivolous issue. Tepaz-Perez did not file a response.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth Circuit reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record identified in it. The court agreed with counsel that the appeal presented no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review.
Accordingly, the court granted counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw, excused counsel from further responsibilities in the case, and dismissed the appeal under Fifth Circuit Rule 42.2. The per curiam opinion was not designated for publication.
Key Takeaways
- An appointed attorney may seek withdrawal by filing an Anders brief when counsel concludes that an appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue.
- The Fifth Circuit independently reviewed counsel’s submission and the relevant portions of the record before accepting that assessment.
- After finding no nonfrivolous appellate issue, the court permitted counsel to withdraw and dismissed the appeal as frivolous.
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 court conducted its own review before allowing withdrawal and dismissing the appeal.
The unpublished disposition also shows that, where that review reveals no nonfrivolous issue, Fifth Circuit Rule 42.2 permits dismissal without full merits briefing.