Court Opinion

ID: 4351754
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2018-12-19 01:00:38.406011+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:24:31.809529
License: Public Domain

Case: 18-10209      Document: 00514765553         Page: 1    Date Filed: 12/18/2018

           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                                    No. 18-10209                     United States Court of Appeals

                                 Conference Calendar
                                                                              Fifth Circuit

                                                                            FILED
                                                                    December 18, 2018

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                                              Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                            Clerk
                                                 Plaintiff–Appellee,

v.

JAVIER GIOVANNI ARAUJO,

                                                 Defendant–Appellant.

                  Appeals from the United States District Court
                       for the Northern District of Texas
                            USDC No. 3:16-CR-478-2

Before KING, ELROD, and WILLETT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Javier Giovanni Araujo 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). Araujo has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed
to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Araujo’s claims of ineffective assistance

       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
    Case: 18-10209      Document: 00514765553   Page: 2   Date Filed: 12/18/2018

                                 No. 18-10209

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 Araujo’s response. We concur with counsel’s
assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review.
Accordingly, counsel’s 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