United States v. Ralston

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-10163
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
GREGORY BRUCE RALSTON,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:99-CR-232-A
--------------------
October 19, 2000
Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appointed counsel for Gregory Bruce Ralston has filed a
motion to withdraw and a brief as required by Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). Ralston has responded,
asserting that counsel has been ineffective and seeking the
appointment of substitute counsel. His ineffective-assistance
claims will not be considered in this direct appeal. See United
States v. Gibson, 55 F.3d 173, 179 (5th Cir. 1995); United States
v. Higdon, 832 F.2d 312, 314 (5th Cir. 1987).

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 00-10163
- 2 -
Our independent review of counsel’s brief and the record
discloses no nonfrivolous issue. 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. Ralston’s motion for the appointment of substitute
counsel is DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --