USA v. Jose Garcia-Rodriguez, No. 16-40540 (5th Cir. 2016)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 16-40540 Document: 00513762339 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/16/2016 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 16-40540 Summary Calendar FILED November 16, 2016 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. JOSE GUADALUPE GARCIA-RODRIGUEZ, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 1:15-CR-974-1 Before JONES, WIENER, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose Guadalupe Garcia-Rodriguez 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). Garcia-Rodriguez has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Garcia-Rodriguez’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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 16-40540 Document: 00513762339 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/16/2016 No. 16-40540 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 brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Garcia-Rodriguez’s response. Although GarciaRodriguez signed a document entitled “Decision Regarding My Appeal,” in which he stated that he wished to appeal only his sentence, we have reviewed the validity of both the conviction and sentence. 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