USA v. Joel Rios-Villanueva


UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [11-50460 Dismissed as Frivolous Judge: JES , Judge: PRO , Judge: SAH Mandate pull date is 11/09/2012 for Appellant Joel Rios-Villanueva; denying motion to appoint counsel filed by Appellant Mr. Joel Rios-Villanueva [6985411-3]; granting motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Ricardo Enrique Calderon, Esq. [6963898-2] [11-50460]

Download PDF
Case: 11-50460 Document: 00512026887 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/19/2012 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 11-50460 Summary Calendar October 19, 2012 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JOEL RIOS-VILLANUEVA, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas No. 2:09-CR-485-2 Before SMITH, OWEN, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The attorney appointed to represent Joel Rios-Villanueva has moved for * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 11-50460 Document: 00512026887 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/19/2012 No. 11-50460 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). Rios-Villanueva has filed a response and has moved for the appointment of new counsel. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, and Rios-Villanueva’s response. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration of the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, which 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 allegations.” United States v. Cantwell, 470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). 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. The motion for the appointment of new counsel is DENIED. 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?