USA v. Jose Renteria-Gutierrez, No. 19-50947 (5th Cir. 2020)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 19-50945 Document: 00515627455 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/05/2020 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED November 5, 2020 No. 19-50945 Conference Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Jose Francisco Renteria-Gutierrez, also known as Jairo Rivera-Gutierrez, also known as Jose F. Renteria-Gutierrez, also known as Gutierrez Renteria, also known as Jose LagardaGutierrez, also known as Jose Francis Lagarda-Gutirrez, also known as Jose Franci Rentiera-Gutierrez, also known as Jose Rivera-Gutierrez, Defendant—Appellant, consolidated with _____________ No. 19-50947 _____________ United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Jose Francisco Renteria-Gutierrez, Defendant—Appellant. Case: 19-50945 Document: 00515627455 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/05/2020 No. 19-50945 c/w No. 19-50947 Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 4:19-CR-15-1 USDC No. 4:19-CR-326-1 Before Graves, Willett, and Duncan, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose Francisco Renteria-Gutierrez moves 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). Renteria-Gutierrez has filed a pro se response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Renteria-Gutierrez’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeals present no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Nevertheless, there is a clerical error in the written judgment in No. 4:19-CR-15 because it does not include 18 U.S.C. § 2 as a violated statutory provision. It will not cause prejudice to the Government if the district court corrects the judgment in that case on remand to include 18 U.S.C. § 2 in the list of violated provisions. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the appeals are DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2. The case is REMANDED to the district court for the limited purpose of correcting the judgment in No. 4:19- * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. 2 Case: 19-50945 Document: 00515627455 Page: 3 Date Filed: 11/05/2020 No. 19-50945 c/w No. 19-50947 CR-15 to include 18 U.S.C. § 2 in the list of violated statutory provisions. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 36. 3
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.
