USA v. Ricardo Lozano, Jr., No. 19-50734 (5th Cir. 2020)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 19-50734 Document: 00515663083 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/07/2020 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED December 7, 2020 No. 19-50734 Conference Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Ricardo Lozano, Jr., Defendant—Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 7:19-CR-43-2 Before Davis, Elrod, and Oldham, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* The attorney appointed to represent Ricardo Lozano, Jr., 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). Lozano has responded. The record is not sufficiently * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. Case: 19-50734 Document: 00515663083 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/07/2020 No. 19-50734 developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Lozano’s claims of ineffective 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 Lozano’s original and supplemental responses. 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. Lozano’s untimely request for appointment of new counsel on appeal is DENIED. See United States v. Wagner, 158 F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir. 1998). 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.