Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-15-40447/USCOURTS-ca5-15-40447-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Ramon Aquilino Leon-Zapon
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-40447

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

RAMON AQUILINO LEON-ZAPON,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:14-CR-1670-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, ELROD, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Ramon Aquilino 

Leon-Zapon 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). Leon-Zapon has filed a response. The record is not 

sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Leon-Zapon’s

claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the 

 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 11, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-40447 Document: 00513305023 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/11/2015
No. 15-40447

2

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 Leon-Zapon’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. Leon-Zapon’s motion to appoint new counsel is DENIED. See 

United States v. Wagner, 158 F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir. 1998). 

 Case: 15-40447 Document: 00513305023 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/11/2015