USA v. Bernardo Lacour

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [12-51267 Dismissed as Frivolous, 13-50010 Dismissed as Moot] Judge: PEH , Judge: JLD , Judge: JEG. Mandate pull date is 04/15/2014 for Appellant Bernardo Lacour; granting motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Ms. Kimberly S. Keller [7452967-2] [12-51267, 13-50010]

Case: 12-51267

Document: 00512572722

Page: 1

Date Filed: 03/25/2014

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-51267
Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit

FILED
March 25, 2014
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.

BERNARDO L. LACOUR, also known as Leon Lacour, Jr., also known as
Bernardo Leonard Lacour, also known as Bernardo Lecour, also known as John
Doe, also known as Bernie Lacour, also known as Bernard Lacour,
______________________
Cons. w/No. 13-50010

Defendant-Appellant

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
BERNARDO LACOUR,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 5:10-CR-1067-1
USDC No. 5:10-CR-840-1

Case: 12-51267

Document: 00512572722

Page: 2

Date Filed: 03/25/2014

No. 12-51267 c/w No. 13-50010

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DENNIS, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Counsel appointed to represent Bernardo L. Lacour 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).
Lacour has filed a response. The record is insufficiently developed to allow
consideration at this time of Lacour’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel;
such a claim generally “cannot be resolved 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).
As to Lacour’s conviction and sentence for wire fraud in case number 1251267, we have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record
reflected therein, as well as Lacour’s response.

We concur with counsel’s

assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review.
As to Lacour’s revocation of probation in case number 13-50010, Lacour
has completed his 24-month sentence.

No further term of probation or

supervised release was imposed upon revocation. Thus, Lacour’s appeal of the
revocation of probation and sentence is moot. See Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S.
1, 7 (1998). Accordingly, as to case number 12-51267, counsel’s motion for leave
to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities
herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED.

As to case number 13-50010,

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.
*

2

Case: 12-51267

Document: 00512572722

Page: 3

Date Filed: 03/25/2014

No. 12-51267 c/w No. 13-50010
counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from
further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED as moot.

3