Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-14-20185/USCOURTS-ca5-14-20185-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
United States of America
Appellee
Jose Gutierrez Villa
Appellant

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-20185

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JOSE GUTIERREZ VILLA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:13-CR-409-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

STEPHEN A. HIGGINSON, Circuit Judge:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose Gutierrez Villa

has moved for leave to withdraw as counsel on appeal 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). Gutierrez Villa has filed responses. The 

record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of 

Gutierrez Villa’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline 

 

* 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

July 16, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 14-20185 Document: 00513118778 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/16/2015
No. 14-20185

2

to consider the claim 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, 

as well as Gutierrez Villa’s responses. We concur with counsel’s assessment 

that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. The motion 

for leave to withdraw is therefore GRANTED, and counsel is excused from 

further responsibilities in this case. Gutierrez Villa’s request to proceed pro se 

is DENIED. See United States v. Polanco–Ozorto, 772 F.3d 1053, 1055 (5th Cir. 

2014) (per curiam) (“[A] criminal defendant’s motion to proceed pro se on 

appeal will be denied if it is filed after the defendant’s counsel has filed an 

Anders brief, as such a request is invoked too late.” (internal quotation marks 

and citation omitted)). The APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 14-20185 Document: 00513118778 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/16/2015