Court Opinion

ID: 4572755
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2020-10-03 00:00:28.601808+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:31:23.422175
License: Public Domain

Case: 19-40838      Document: 00515588023         Page: 1     Date Filed: 10/02/2020

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

                                                                              FILED
                                                                        October 2, 2020
                                  No. 19-40838
                               Conference Calendar                       Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                              Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                              Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Daniel Mendoza,

                                                           Defendant—Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Eastern District of Texas
                            USDC No. 4:18-CR-188-1

   Before King, Southwick, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          The attorney appointed to represent Daniel Mendoza 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).
   Mendoza has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to

          *
            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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 19-40838        Document: 00515588023       Page: 2   Date Filed: 10/02/2020

                                   No. 19-40838

   allow us to make a fair evaluation of Mendoza’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 Mendoza’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, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and
   the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

                                        2