Court Opinion

ID: 6113658
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-28 19:00:26.330327+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:02:17.072121
License: Public Domain

Case: 20-50622     Document: 00516183816         Page: 1     Date Filed: 01/28/2022

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

                                                                             FILED
                                  No. 20-50622                         January 28, 2022
                                Summary Calendar                        Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                             Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                             Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Marcelo Ivan Gutierrez-Melendez,

                                                         Defendant—Appellant.

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                       for the Western District of Texas
                            USDC No. 4:20-CR-5-1

   Before Higginbotham, Higginson, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Marcelo Ivan
   Gutierrez-Melendez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed briefs in
   accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States
   v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Gutierrez-Melendez has filed multiple

          *
            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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 20-50622      Document: 00516183816           Page: 2    Date Filed: 01/28/2022

                                     No. 20-50622

   responses. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair
   evaluation of Gutierrez-Melendez’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 briefs and the relevant portions of the
   record reflected therein, as well as Gutierrez-Melendez’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