Court Opinion

ID: 9388889
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-22 00:00:29.567167+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:23.706873
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-40221     Document: 00516722176         Page: 1     Date Filed: 04/21/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit                                United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                 Fifth Circuit

                                                                               FILED
                                                                           April 21, 2023
                                  No. 22-40221
                                Summary Calendar                          Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                               Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                             Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Daniel Morales Hinojosa,

                                                         Defendant—Appellant.

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Southern District of Texas
                           USDC No. 5:20-CR-786-4

   Before Higginbotham, Graves, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          The attorney appointed to represent Daniel Morales Hinojosa 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). Morales Hinojosa has filed an untimely response, in which

          *
            Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 22-40221     Document: 00516722176           Page: 2   Date Filed: 04/21/2023

                                    No. 22-40221

   he asks this court to remove appointed counsel, strike counsel’s pleadings
   and motions, and allow him to proceed pro se. A judge of this court
   previously ordered Morales Hinojosa to notify this court clearly and
   unequivocally whether he wished to proceed pro se on appeal. Morales
   Hinojosa has not filed a response or otherwise complied with that order. To
   the extent that Morales Hinojosa requests leave to file an out-of-time
   response, his motion is GRANTED. His motions to proceed pro se,
   remove appointed counsel, and strike counsel’s pleadings are DENIED.
   See Fifth Circuit Plan Under the Criminal Justice Act
   § 5(B); see also 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(c).
          We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the
   record reflected therein, as well as Morales Hinojosa’s response. The record
   is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Morales
   Hinojosa’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 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