USA v. Robin Haigler, No. 16-51361 (5th Cir. 2018)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Case: 16-51361 Document: 00514431645 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/16/2018 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 16-51361 Summary Calendar FILED April 16, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. ROBIN RENEE HAIGLER, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 6:16-CR-39-3 Before KING, ELROD, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Robin Renee Haigler has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed briefs in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Haigler has filed several responses. Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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: 16-51361 Document: 00514431645 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/16/2018 No. 16-51361 The record is insufficient to permit us to consider Haigler’s claim that she was induced to plead guilty by her trial counsel’s unkept promises regarding sentencing and his failure to explain the plea process. See United States v. Corbett, 742 F.2d 173, 176–78 (5th Cir. 1984). She may raise such claims in a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. Id. at 178 n.11. Nor do we reach Haigler’s remaining ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims, as this is not one of the “rare cases in which the record allows a reviewing court to fairly evaluate the merits of the claim” on direct appeal. United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014) (quotation marks omitted). We have reviewed counsel’s briefs and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Haigler’s responses. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Counsel’s 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.