USA v. Raymundo Pina, No. 15-50792 (5th Cir. 2016)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 15-50792 Document: 00513441669 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/28/2016 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 15-50792 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED March 28, 2016 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. RAYMUNDO JOSE PINA, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 7:08-CR-181-3 Before DAVIS, JONES, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Raymundo Jose Pina appeals after pleading guilty and being sentenced for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine. He contends that plea counsel was ineffective for failing to assert that his right to a speedy trial was violated by the passage of years between indictment and arrest. Generally, we do not review claims of ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal. United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014). 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 15-50792 Document: 00513441669 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/28/2016 No. 15-50792 Typically, such a claim warrants review on direct appeal only when it was raised and developed in a post-trial motion to the district court. United States v. Stevens, 487 F.3d 232, 245 (5th Cir. 2007). Pina did not raise his claim in the district court. Here, he argues about the underlying speedy trial claim and then concludes simply that counsel was ineffective for failing to raise it. Counsel has not been invited to address the speedy trial issue or the claim of ineffectiveness. Accordingly, the record is not sufficiently developed to allow for fair consideration of this claim, and we decline to consider it now, without prejudice to Pina’s right to raise it on collateral review. See Isgar, 739 F.3d at 841. The judgment is AFFIRMED. Pina’s motion to supplement the record on appeal is DENIED. 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.