USA v. Jose Orona-Castillo

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [10-50857 Dismissed AS FRIVOLOUS] Judge: TMR , Judge: JLD , Judge: EBC Mandate pull date is 04/26/2011 for Appellant Jose Luis Orona-Castillo; denying motion to appoint counsel filed by Appellant Mr. Jose Luis Orona-Castillo [6743476-3]; granting motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Appellant Mr. Alexander Lee Calhoun for Appellant Mr. Jose Luis Orona-Castillo [6718285-2] [10-50857]

Download PDF
Case: 10-50857 Document: 00511435047 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/05/2011 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 10-50857 Summary Calendar April 5, 2011 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. JOSE LUIS ORONA-CASTILLO, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 4:04-CR-170-1 Before REAVLEY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The attorney appointed to represent Jose Luis Orona-Castillo has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Orona-Castillo has filed a response. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Orona-Castillo’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 the district court since no opportunity existed to develop the record on the merits of the * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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: 10-50857 Document: 00511435047 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/05/2011 No. 10-50857 allegations.” United States v. Cantwell, 470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, and OronaCastillo’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. Orona-Castillo’s request for appointment of counsel is DENIED. Cf. United States v. Wagner, 158 F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir. 1998). 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?