USA v. Armando Ramirez-Roja


UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [13-40870 Dismissed as Frivolous] Judge: ECP , Judge: JWE , Judge: CH Mandate pull date is 05/07/2014 for Appellant Armando Silvestre Ramirez-Rojas; granting motion to file response out of time filed by Appellant Mr. Armando Silvestre Ramirez-Rojas [7613217-2]; granting motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. H. Michael Sokolow [7511698-2] [13-40870]

Download PDF
Case: 13-40870 Document: 00512599159 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/16/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 13-40870 Conference Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED April 16, 2014 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee Lyle W. Cayce Clerk v. ARMANDO SILVESTRE RAMIREZ-ROJAS, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:12-CR-1562-1 Before PRADO, ELROD, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Armando Silvestre Ramirez-Rojas 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). Ramirez-Rojas filed an untimely document styled as a “notice of appeal” which we construe as a motion for leave to file a late response and as a response (which contained a list of untranslated 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 13-40870 Document: 00512599159 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/16/2014 No. 13-40870 concerns in Spanish and others in English). We GRANT the motion for leave. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Ramirez-Rojas’s document. To the extent that Ramirez-Rojas is attempting to raise a challenge of ineffective assistance of counsel, we conclude that the record is insufficiently developed to address these claims on direct appeal. See United States v. Cantwell, 470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir. 2006). 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

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?