United States v. Ramiro Rodriguez, Jr.

562 F. App'x 260
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedApril 15, 2014
Docket13-50198
StatusUnpublished

This text of 562 F. App'x 260 (United States v. Ramiro Rodriguez, Jr.) 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. Ramiro Rodriguez, Jr., 562 F. App'x 260 (5th Cir. 2014).

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Ramiro Rodriguez, Jr., has moved for leave *261 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). Rodriguez has filed a response.

The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Rodriguez’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; such claims ordinarily “cannot be resolved on direct appeal when [they have] 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 Rodriguez’s response. 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. Rodriguez’s motion for the appointment of new counsel is DENIED. See United States v. Wagner, 158 F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir.1998).

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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

United States v. Wagner
158 F.3d 901 (Fifth Circuit, 1998)
United States v. Cantwell
470 F.3d 1087 (Fifth Circuit, 2006)
Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
United States v. Flores
632 F.3d 229 (Fifth Circuit, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
562 F. App'x 260, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-ramiro-rodriguez-jr-ca5-2014.