United States v. Juan Ceniceros-Gonzalez

616 F. App'x 144
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 17, 2015
Docket15-10134
StatusUnpublished

This text of 616 F. App'x 144 (United States v. Juan Ceniceros-Gonzalez) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Juan Ceniceros-Gonzalez, 616 F. App'x 144 (5th Cir. 2015).

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Juan Ceniceros-Gonzalez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir.2011). Ceniceros-Gonzalez has filed a response.

The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Ceniceros-Gonzalez’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 135 S.Ct. 123, 190 L.Ed.2d 94 (2014). Nor is the record sufficiently developed for us to address Cenice-ros-Gonzalez’s contentions that his guilty plea was induced by force, threats, or an unfulfilled promise that does not appear in the record. See United States v. Corbett, 742 F.2d 173, 176-78 (5th Cir.1984). We therefore decline to consider these claims without prejudice to Ceniceros-Gonzalez’s right, if any, to seek collateral review. See Isgar, 739 F.3d at 841; Corbett, 742 F.2d at 178 n. 11.

We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Ceniceros-Gon-zalez’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, Ceniceros-Gonzalez’s request *145 for appointment of new counsel is DENIED, 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.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set-forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
United States v. Flores
632 F.3d 229 (Fifth Circuit, 2011)
United States v. George S. (Joe) Corbett
742 F.2d 173 (Fifth Circuit, 1984)
United States v. Gilbert Isgar
739 F.3d 829 (Fifth Circuit, 2014)
Varellas v. U.S. Parole Comm'n
135 S. Ct. 123 (Supreme Court, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
616 F. App'x 144, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-juan-ceniceros-gonzalez-ca5-2015.