Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-15-41108/USCOURTS-ca5-15-41108-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Emerico De Luna-Magallon
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-41108

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

EMERICO DE LUNA-MAGALLON, also known as Jorge Trevino-Gonzalez,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:12-CR-435-1

Before JONES, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Emerico De LunaMagallon 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). De Luna-Magallon has filed a response and a motion 

for the appointment of new counsel on appeal. The record is not sufficiently 

developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of De Luna-Magallon’s claim 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 21, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-41108 Document: 00513558219 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/21/2016
No. 15-41108

2

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 De Luna-Magallon’s response. We concur with 

counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for 

appellate review. Accordingly, De Luna-Magallon’s motion for the 

appointment of new counsel is DENIED, 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.

 Case: 15-41108 Document: 00513558219 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/21/2016