USA v. Edmundo Lopez-Escamilla, No. 17-40843 (5th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 17-40843 Document: 00514523823 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/21/2018 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 17-40843 Summary Calendar FILED June 21, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. EDMUNDO LOPEZ-ESCAMILLA, also known as Mundo, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:14-CR-91-15 Before DAVIS, COSTA, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Edmundo Lopez-Escamilla 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). Lopez-Escamilla has filed a response. He has also moved for the appointment of substitute counsel. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Lopez-Escamilla’s claims of ineffective 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 17-40843 Document: 00514523823 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/21/2018 No. 17-40843 assistance of counsel; we therefore 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 Lopez-Escamilla’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Our review reveals a clerical error in the judgment. The judgment states that Lopez-Escamilla pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to manufacture and distribute cocaine. Lopez-Escamilla pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine; therefore, the word “manufacture” should be deleted from the description of the nature of the offense. Accordingly, 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. Lopez-Escamilla’s request for the appointment of substitute counsel is DENIED. This matter is REMANDED for the limited purpose of correcting the clerical error in the judgment. See FED. R. CRIM. P. 36. 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.
