USA v. Edgar Rodriguez-Guaiquirian

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [14-10740 Dismissed as Frivolous] Judge: ECP , Judge: PRO , Judge: JEG. Mandate pull date is 07/09/2015 for Appellant Edgar Enrique Rodriguez-Guaiquirian; granting motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Shane John Stolarczyk, Esq. [7844538-2] [14-10740]

Case: 14-10740

Document: 00513084246

Page: 1

Date Filed: 06/18/2015

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-10740
Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit

FILED
June 18, 2015

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff–Appellee,

Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk

v.
EDGAR ENRIQUE RODRIGUEZ-GUAIQUIRIAN,
Defendant–Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:13-CR-37-1
Before PRADO, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
The attorney appointed to represent Edgar Enrique RodriguezGuaiquirian 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). Rodriguez-Guaiquirian has filed a
response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair
evaluation of Rodriguez-Guaiquirian’s claims of ineffective assistance of

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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 14-10740

Document: 00513084246

Page: 2

Date Filed: 06/18/2015

No. 14-10740
counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claims without prejudice to
collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir.), cert.
denied, 135 S. Ct. 123 (2014).
We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record
reflected therein, as well as Rodriguez-Guaiquirian’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 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2