Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-14-50032/USCOURTS-ca5-14-50032-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Arturo Casas
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-50032

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ARTURO CASAS,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 3:12-CR-976

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Arturo Casas was convicted of conspiring to knowingly possess stolen 

firearms, knowing possession of stolen firearms, and being a felon in possession 

of a firearm. On appeal, he contends for the first time that his trial counsel 

provided ineffective assistance by failing to object to certain offense level 

calculations and failing to advise the district court about mitigating factors 

such as his hearing loss, memory loss, and dementia.

* 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

March 9, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

Case: 14-50032 Document: 00512961842 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/09/2015
No. 14-50032

“We have held that ‘Sixth Amendment claims of ineffective assistance of 

counsel should not be litigated on direct appeal, unless they were previously 

presented to the trial court.’” United States v. Aguilar, 503 F.3d 431, 436 (5th

Cir. 2007) (quoting United States v. Partida, 385 F.3d 546, 568 (5th Cir. 2004)). 

Only in rare cases, when the record allows this court to “fairly evaluate the 

merits of the claim,” will this court consider such claims on direct appeal. Id.

Casas’s claims were not raised in the district court, and an evidentiary hearing 

was not conducted. The record is not sufficiently developed to permit review 

of the claims on direct appeal. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 

(5th Cir.), cert. denied, 135 S. Ct. 123 (2014). Accordingly, we deny the claims

without prejudice to Casas raising them on collateral review.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

2

Case: 14-50032 Document: 00512961842 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/09/2015