Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-14-20755/USCOURTS-ca5-14-20755-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Ricardo Arellano-Romero
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-20755

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff–Appellee,

v.

RICARDO ARELLANO-ROMERO, also known as Adrian Chaves, also known 

as Ricardo Arellano Romero, also known as Ricardo Romero-Arellando, also 

known as Adrian Chavez, also known as Fernando Quintana,

Defendant–Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:14-CR-286-1

Before KING, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Ricardo ArellanoRomero 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). Arellano-Romero has filed a response. The record is 

not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Arellano-

 

* 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

February 12, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 14-20755 Document: 00513379374 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/12/2016
No. 14-20755

2

Romero’s claims of ineffective assistance of 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 Arellano-Romero’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, 

and counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein. Arellano-Romero’s 

motions for appointment of substitute counsel or to proceed pro se and for 

transcripts are DENIED. See United States v. Wagner, 158 F.3d 901, 902-03 

(5th Cir. 1998). The APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 14-20755 Document: 00513379374 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/12/2016