USA v. Hugo Espinoza-Gonzalez


UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [10-40709 Dismissed as Frivolous] Judge: TMR , Judge: JLD , Judge: EBC Mandate pull date is 07/07/2011 for Appellant Hugo Espinoza-Gonzalez; granting motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Robert Gerard Arrambide, Esq. [6679809-2] [10-40709]

Download PDF
Case: 10-40709 Document: 00511510762 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/16/2011 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 10-40709 Summary Calendar June 16, 2011 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. HUGO ESPINOZA-GONZALEZ, also known as Joel Albert Espinoza, Defendant-Appellant Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:09-CR-217-1 Before REAVLEY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Hugo EspinozaGonzalez 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). Espinoza-Gonzalez has filed a response. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of EspinozaGonzalez’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; such a claim generally “cannot be resolved on direct appeal when the claim has not been raised before * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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: 10-40709 Document: 00511510762 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/16/2011 No. 10-40709 the district court since no opportunity existed to develop the record on the merits of the allegations.” United States v. Cantwell, 470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). We have reviewed counsel’s briefs and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Espinoza-Gonzalez’s response. 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 5 TH C IR. R. 42.2. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?