USA v. Marcos Torales-Sanchez, No. 13-40295 (5th Cir. 2014)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 13-40295 Document: 00512689439 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/08/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 13-40295 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED July 8, 2014 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee Lyle W. Cayce Clerk v. MARCOS HELIODORO TORALES-SANCHEZ, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:12-CR-852-1 Before KING, DAVIS, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Marcos Heliodoro Torales-Sanchez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed original and supplemental briefs in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Torales-Sanchez has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Torales-Sanchez s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. * Case: 13-40295 Document: 00512689439 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/08/2014 No. 13-40295 decline to consider the claims without prejudice to collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014). We have reviewed counsel s briefs and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Torales-Sanchez s response. We concur with counsel s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, the 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. Torales-Sanchez s motion for appointment of new counsel is DENIED. See United States v. Wagner, 158 F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir. 1998). 2

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.