USA v. Michelle Freytag, No. 15-20646 (5th Cir. 2017)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 15-20646 Document: 00514001929 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/22/2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 15-20646 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED May 22, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. MICHELLE R. FREYTAG, Defendant–Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:15-CR-67-1 Before REAVLEY, OWEN, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Michelle R. Freytag has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed briefs in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Freytag has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Freytag’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claims without prejudice to 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 15-20646 Document: 00514001929 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/22/2017 No. 15-20646 collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014); United States v. Corbett, 742 F.2d 173, 177 (5th Cir. 1984) (per curiam). We have reviewed counsel’s briefs and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Freytag’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, Freytag’s motion for appointment of new counsel, to strike the briefs, and to remand the case to the district court for resentencing is DENIED, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.