USA v. Sean Sharer, No. 16-10788 (5th Cir. 2017)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Case: 16-10788 Document: 00513955963 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/18/2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 16-10788 Conference Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED April 18, 2017 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee Lyle W. Cayce Clerk v. SEAN SHARER, also known as Cowboy Sean, Defendant-Appellant Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:14-CR-367-18 Before KING, HAYNES, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Sean Sharer has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Sharer has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Sharer’s claims of ineffective assistance of 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 16-10788 Document: 00513955963 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/18/2017 No. 16-10788 counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claims 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 Sharer’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, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. Sharer’s request to proceed pro se on appeal is untimely, and, therefore, it is DENIED. See United States v. Wagner, 158 F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir. 1998). 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.