Court Opinion

ID: 9879170
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-27 18:00:38.012376+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:48:01.166165
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-10948         Document: 00516910431             Page: 1      Date Filed: 09/27/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________
                                                                                United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit
                                       No. 22-10948
                                     Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                     ____________                             September 27, 2023
                                                                                  Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                           Clerk

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Damien Dre Gonzales,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Northern District of Texas
                                USDC No. 5:21-CR-76-1
                      ______________________________

   Before Smith, Higginson, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          The attorney appointed to represent Damien Dre Gonzales 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). Gonzales has filed a response. He also filed two supplemental

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-10948     Document: 00516910431           Page: 2   Date Filed: 09/27/2023

                                    No. 22-10948

   responses, which are each construed a motion for leave to file a supplemental
   response and are GRANTED.
          The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair
   evaluation—on direct appeal—of Gonzales’s claims of coercion, unkept
   promises, and ineffective assistance of counsel. Such claims are more
   appropriately raised in a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate. Accordingly, we
   decline to consider these claims without prejudice to collateral review. See
   United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014); United States v.
   Corbett, 742 F.2d 173, 175-78 & n.11 (5th Cir. 1984).
          Otherwise, we have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions
   of the record reflected therein, as well as Gonzales’s responses. 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, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and
   the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

                                         2