UNITED STATES v. CHANG (2021)

The attorney appointed to represent Wayne Joseph Chang has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Chang has filed a response. Among other things, he argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel in connection with his decision to plead guilty and his sentencing. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of these claims; we therefore decline to consider them 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 Chang's response. We concur with counsel's assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel's 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. To the extent Chang moves for the appointment of substitute counsel, the motion is DENIED. See United States v. Wagner, 158 F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir. 1998).

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.  

Per Curiam:* FN* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.