USA v. Christopher Ryman, No. 13-10050 (5th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case

The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on January 20, 2014.

Download PDF

Case: 13-10050 Document: 00512473032 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/17/2013 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 13-10050 Conference Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED December 17, 2013 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee Lyle W. Cayce Clerk v. CHRISTOPHER EARL RYMAN, also known as Christopher Fred Ryman, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:11-CR-250-38 Before DAVIS, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Christopher Earl Ryman 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). Ryman has filed responses. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Ryman s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; such a claim generally cannot be resolved on direct appeal when the 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 13-10050 Document: 00512473032 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/17/2013 No. 13-10050 claim has not been raised before the district court since no opportunity existed to develop the record on the merits of the allegations. United States v. Cantwell, 470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). We have reviewed counsel s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Ryman s responses. 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. Ryman s motion to relieve counsel and appoint substitute counsel is DENIED. 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.