USA v. Robert Everhart
Filing
UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [16-10663 Dismissed as Frivolous] Judge: WED, Judge: LHS, Judge: SAH. Mandate pull date is 02/01/2017 for Appellant Robert Everhart; granting motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Andrew Ottaway [8307698-2] [16-10663]
Case: 16-10663
Document: 00513831855
Page: 1
Date Filed: 01/11/2017
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-10663
Summary Calendar
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
January 11, 2017
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
ROBERT EVERHART,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:15-CR-271-6
Before DAVIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
The attorney appointed to represent Robert Everhart 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).
Everhart has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow
us to make a fair evaluation of Everhart’s claims of ineffective assistance of
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 16-10663
Document: 00513831855
Page: 2
Date Filed: 01/11/2017
No. 16-10663
counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claims without prejudice to
collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014).
We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record
reflected therein, as well as Everhart’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
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?