United States v. Herschel Caruthers , 479 F. App'x 651 ( 2012 )


Menu:
  •      Case: 12-40225     Document: 00512003119         Page: 1     Date Filed: 09/28/2012
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT  United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    September 28, 2012
    No. 12-40225
    Summary Calendar                        Lyle W. Cayce
    Clerk
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee
    v.
    HERSCHEL WAYNE CARUTHERS,
    Defendant-Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Texas
    USDC No. 2:11-CR-763-1
    Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Herschel Wayne
    Caruthers 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).         Caruthers has filed a response.            The record is
    insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Caruthers’s claims
    of ineffective assistance of counsel; such claims generally “cannot be resolved on
    direct appeal when the claim has not been raised before the district court since
    *
    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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 12-40225    Document: 00512003119      Page: 2   Date Filed: 09/28/2012
    No. 12-40225
    no opportunity existed to develop the record on the merits of the allegations.”
    United States v. Cantwell, 
    470 F.3d 1087
    , 1091 (5th Cir. 2006) (internal
    quotation marks and citation omitted). We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the
    relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Caruthers’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. Caruthers’s motion for the
    appointment of substitute counsel is DENIED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 12-40225

Citation Numbers: 479 F. App'x 651

Filed Date: 9/28/2012

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/31/2014