USA v. Jose Ramos-Moreno

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [16-40853 Dismissed as Frivolous] Judge: CDK , Judge: CH , Judge: JEG. Mandate pull date is 05/09/2017 for Appellant Jose Ramiro Ramos-Moreno; granting motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Timothy William Crooks [8362503-2]; denying motion to vacate the judgment of the district court filed by Appellant Mr. Jose Ramiro Ramos-Moreno [8389785-3]; denying motion to remand case filed by Appellant Mr. Jose Ramiro Ramos-Moreno [8389785-4] [16-40853]

Case: 16-40853

Document: 00513955928

Page: 1

Date Filed: 04/18/2017

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-40853
Conference Calendar

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit

FILED
April 18, 2017

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee

Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk

v.
JOSE RAMIRO RAMOS-MORENO,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 5:15-CR-1079-1
Before KING, HAYNES, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose Ramiro RamosMoreno 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).

Ramos-Moreno has filed a response with an

incorporated motion asking this court to vacate his sentence and remand the
case to the district court for resentencing based on a claim that he received

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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 16-40853

Document: 00513955928

Page: 2

Date Filed: 04/18/2017

No. 16-40853
ineffective assistance of counsel. The record is not sufficiently developed to
allow us to make a fair evaluation of Ramos-Moreno’s claim of ineffective
assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claim without
prejudice to collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841
(5th Cir. 2014).
We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record
reflected therein, as well as Ramos-Moreno’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, Ramos-Moreno’s
motion is DENIED, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2