Case: 19-11165      Document: 00515582392         Page: 1    Date Filed: 09/29/2020




              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit                              United States Court of Appeals
                                                                               Fifth Circuit

                                                                             FILED
                                                                    September 29, 2020
                                  No. 19-11165
                                                                        Lyle W. Cayce
                               Conference Calendar
                                                                             Clerk


   United States of America,

                                                             Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Joshua David Lane,

                                                          Defendant—Appellant.


                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Northern District of Texas
                            USDC No. 3:18-CR-6-1


   Before Graves, Willett, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          The attorney appointed to represent Joshua David Lane has moved
   for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v.
   California, 

(1967), and United States v. Flores, 

(5th
   Cir. 2011). Lane has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed


          *
            Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 19-11165      Document: 00515582392           Page: 2    Date Filed: 09/29/2020




                                     No. 19-11165


   to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Lane’s claims of ineffective assistance
   of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claims without prejudice to
   collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 

, 841 (5th Cir. 2014).
          We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the
   record reflected therein, as well as Lane’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, Lane’s
   motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED, and the APPEAL IS
   DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.




                                          2