USA v. Celin Montoya-Rodriguez, No. 17-40981 (5th Cir. 2018)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 17-40981 Document: 00514472937 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/15/2018 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 17-40981 Summary Calendar FILED May 15, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. CELIN JAVIER MONTOYA-RODRIGUEZ, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:16-CR-1883-2 Before REAVLEY, GRAVES, and HO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Celin Javier Montoya-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). Montoya-Rodriguez has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 17-40981 Document: 00514472937 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/15/2018 No. 17-40981 nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Our review also reveals clerical errors in the district court’s written statement of reasons, which does not reflect the guidelines range calculated by the district court or the below-guidelines nature of the sentence imposed. 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. The case is REMANDED for the limited purpose of correcting the clerical errors in the written statement of reasons. See FED. R. CRIM. P. 36; United States v. Cole, 569 F. App’x 195, 196 (5th Cir. 2014). 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.