United States v. Ruiz-Bedolla

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedMarch 15, 2022
Docket21-40709
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Ruiz-Bedolla (United States v. Ruiz-Bedolla) 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. Ruiz-Bedolla, (5th Cir. 2022).

Opinion

Case: 21-40709 Document: 00516239531 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/15/2022

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

FILED March 15, 2022 No. 21-40709 Lyle W. Cayce Summary Calendar Clerk

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Ernesto Ruiz-Bedolla,

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:21-CR-309-1

Before Wiener, Dennis, and Haynes, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Ernesto Ruiz- Bedolla 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). Ruiz-Bedolla has not filed a response. We have

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.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: 21-40709 Document: 00516239531 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/15/2022

No. 21-40709

reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. It is dispositive that the Government has declined to waive the untimeliness of Ruiz-Bedolla’s appeal. See United States v. Pesina-Rodriguez, 825 F.3d 787, 788 (5th Cir. 2016) (per curiam). Thus, 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.

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. Manuel Pesina-Rodriguez
825 F.3d 787 (Fifth Circuit, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Ruiz-Bedolla, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-ruiz-bedolla-ca5-2022.