Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-15-51105/USCOURTS-ca5-15-51105-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Olegario Astudillo
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-51105

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

OLEGARIO ASTUDILLO, also known as Chirro, also known as Nanche, also 

known as Jesus Hernandez, also known as Javier Gabriel Carachure, also 

known as Olegario Hernandez Astudillo,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 1:15-CR-236-2

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Olegario Astudillo 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).

Astudillo has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow

us to make a fair evaluation of Astudillo’s claims of ineffective assistance 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

August 9, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-51105 Document: 00513629304 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/09/2016
No. 15-51105

2

counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claims 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 Astudillo’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, Astudillo’s motion 

for appointment of new counsel is DENIED, counsel is excused from further 

responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 15-51105 Document: 00513629304 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/09/2016