USA v. Joseph Berzat, No. 19-20032 (5th Cir. 2019)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 19-20032 Document: 00515204967 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/19/2019 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 19-20032 Conference Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED November 19, 2019 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee Lyle W. Cayce Clerk v. JOSEPH BERZAT, Defendant-Appellant Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:17-CR-254-1 Before STEWART, DENNIS, and HO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Joseph Berzat 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). Berzat has filed a response and an incorporated motion to appoint new counsel, which is DENIED. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Berzat’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; we 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 19-20032 Document: 00515204967 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/19/2019 No. 19-20032 therefore decline to consider the claim without prejudice to his petition for 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 Berzat’s response. We concur in counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. To the extent that Berzat challenges Count 2 of his conviction for aiding and abetting the use and discharge of a firearm during the commission of a crime of violence and his sentence, his arguments are barred by the waiver provision in his knowing and voluntary plea agreement. 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. 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.