USA v. Omar Vazquez-Avendano, No. 17-41015 (5th Cir. 2018)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 17-41015 Document: 00514627159 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/04/2018 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 17-41015 Conference Calendar FILED September 4, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. OMAR VAZQUEZ-AVENDANO, also known as El Toro, Defendant-Appellant Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:16-CR-876-11 Before HIGGINSON, COSTA, and HO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Omar Vazquez-Avendano 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). Vazquez-Avendano has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of VazquezAvendano’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 17-41015 Document: 00514627159 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/04/2018 No. 17-41015 consider the claim 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 VazquezAvendano’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. 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. Vazquez-Avendano’s motion asking the court to order counsel to brief the issues raised in his response, to vacate his conviction and sentence, and to remand to the district court 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.