USA v. Gary Robinson

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [12-41274 Dismissed as frivolous ] Judge: TMR , Judge: PRO , Judge: LHS Mandate pull date is 03/14/2014 for Appellant Gary Eugene Robinson; granting motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Frank Warren Henderson, Esq. [7360264-2] [12-41274]

Case: 12-41274

Document: 00512539655

Page: 1

Date Filed: 02/21/2014

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-41274
Conference Calendar

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit

FILED
February 21, 2014

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee

Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk

v.
GARY EUGENE ROBINSON,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:11-CR-235-1
Before REAVLEY, OWEN, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Gary Eugene
Robinson 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).

Robinson has filed a response.

The record is

insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Robinson’s claims
of ineffective assistance of counsel; such claims generally “cannot be resolved

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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 12-41274

Document: 00512539655

Page: 2

Date Filed: 02/21/2014

No. 12-41274
on direct appeal when the claim has not been raised before the district court
since 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
Robinson’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.

2