USA v. Jorge Calderon-Canas, No. 15-10417 (5th Cir. 2016)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 15-10417 Document: 00513471959 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/20/2016 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 15-10417 Conference Calendar FILED April 20, 2016 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. JORGE CALDERON-CANAS, also known as Sobrino, also known as Sottero Alanzo Franko, also known as Lucas Vargas Dias, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:13-CR-466-5 Before REAVLEY, ELROD, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Jorge Calderon-Canas 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). Calderon-Canas has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Calderon-Canas’s claim of 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 15-10417 Document: 00513471959 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/20/2016 No. 15-10417 ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claim without prejudice to such right to collateral review as Calderon-Canas may have. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014). We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant parts of the record reflected therein, as well as Calderon-Canas’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. 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.