Testo completo
*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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
June 21, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-40737
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
TROY DIONNE CANADY,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:02-CR-84-ALL
Before JONES, BENAVIDES and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Private counsel appointed to represent Troy Dionne Canady
has requested leave to withdraw and has filed a brief pursuant to
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Canady has filed a
response to the instant motion alleging ineffective assistance of
trial counsel. Canady’s argument is not cognizable in the instant
appeal. See United States v. Higdon, 832 F.2d 312, 313-14 (5th
Cir. 1987).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
Our independent review of the brief, the response, and
the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Counsel’s
motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from
further responsibilities, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR.
R. 42.2.
MOTION GRANTED; APPEAL DISMISSED.
-- 2 of 2 --
