United States v. Colorado-Cuero

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
• Decided: May 28, 2021
• Docket: 19-40124
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Case: 19-40124 Document: 00515880853 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/28/2021

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

FILED May 28, 2021 No. 19-40124 Conference Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Esmir Colorado-Cuero,

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:17-CR-20-7

Before Davis, Elrod, and Oldham, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* The attorney appointed to represent Esmir Colorado-Cuero 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). Colorado-Cuero has not filed a response in this case, but he

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. Case: 19-40124 Document: 00515880853 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/28/2021

No. 19-40124

has filed a response to his counsel’s Anders motion filed in No. 19-40126, in which he presents arguments pertinent to the instant criminal proceeding. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Colorado-Cuero’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claim 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 Colorado-Cuero’s response filed in No. 19-40126. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s 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.