USA v. Jorge Gaytan Martell
UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [16-50449 Dismissed as Frivolous] Judge: EGJ , Judge: PRO , Judge: CH Mandate pull date is 09/28/2017 for Appellant Jorge Alberto Gaytan Martell; granting motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Shannon Charles Hooks [8301427-2] [16-50449]
Date Filed: 09/07/2017
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
Fif h Circuit
September 7, 2017
Lyle W. Cayce
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
JORGE ALBERTO GAYTAN MARTELL, also known as Jorge, also known as
Gera, also known as Gerardo Carreon, also known as Aaron Cordero, also
known as Alejandro Carrillo,
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 3:15-CR-182-6
Before JOLLY, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges
PER CURIAM: *
The attorney appointed to represent Jorge Alberto Gaytan Martell,
Shannon Charles Hooks, has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed briefs
in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States
v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Gaytan Martell has filed a response.
The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
Date Filed: 09/07/2017
Gaytan Martell’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 briefs and the relevant portions of the record
reflected therein, as well as Gaytan Martell’s response.
We concur with
counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for
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.
Nevertheless, we note that counsel’s initial and supplemental briefs
failed adequately to address the appeal waiver’s scope and enforceability,
offering no legal analysis and, in the case of the supplemental brief,
inaccurately setting out the terms of the waiver.
We have previously
admonished counsel regarding such deficiencies. Counsel is WARNED that
continued deficient performance may result in the imposition of sanctions,
including the denial of payment for services rendered, removal from cases, or
disqualification from performing work pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act in
cases appealed to this court.
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?