USA v. David Rougeau

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [17-40323 Dismissed as Frivolous] Judge: PEH, Judge: EHJ, Judge: JES. Mandate issue date is 01/29/2018 for Appellant David Tiberious Rougeau; granting Motion to file response out of time filed by Appellant Mr. David Tiberious Rougeau [8594998-2]; granting Motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Ms. Denise S. Benson, Esq. [8535990-2] [17-40323]

Case: 17-40323

Document: 00514296440

Page: 1

Date Filed: 01/05/2018

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-40323
Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit

FILED
January 5, 2018
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
DAVID TIBERIOUS ROUGEAU,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:16-CR-54-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent David Tiberious
Rougeau 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). Rougeau has filed an untimely response and a
motion asking that we consider his response despite its untimeliness. That
motion is GRANTED.

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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 17-40323

Document: 00514296440

Page: 2

Date Filed: 01/05/2018

No. 17-40323
We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record
reflected therein, as well as Rougeau’s response. The record is not sufficiently
developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Rougeau’s claim of ineffective
assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider that claim without
prejudice to collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841
(5th Cir. 2014). 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