USA v. Eduardo Lopez-Varga

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [11-20699 Dismissed as Frivolous] Judge: TMR , Judge: EGJ , Judge: WED Mandate pull date is 02/11/2013 for Appellant Eduardo Lopez-Vargas; granting motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Edward Cantu, Esq. [7187710-2], granting motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Edward Cantu, Esq. [7058059-2] [11-20699]

Case: 11-20699

Document: 00512118773

Page: 1

Date Filed: 01/21/2013

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Fifth Circuit

FILED
No. 11-20699
Summary Calendar

January 21, 2013
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
EDUARDO LOPEZ-VARGAS,
Defendant-Appellant

Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:09-CR-534-4

Before REAVLEY, JOLLY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The attorney appointed to represent Eduardo Lopez-Vargas has moved for
leave to withdraw and has filed a brief and supplemental brief in accordance
with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632
F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Lopez-Vargas has filed a response. The record is
insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Lopez-Vargas’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
*

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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 11-20699

Document: 00512118773

Page: 2

Date Filed: 01/21/2013

No. 11-20699
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 LopezVargas’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.

2