Court Opinion

ID: 9838327
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-06 00:00:25.378969+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:45:32.888572
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-11150         Document: 00516884263             Page: 1      Date Filed: 09/05/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________
                                                                                United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit
                                       No. 22-11150
                                     Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                     ____________                              September 5, 2023
                                                                                  Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                           Clerk

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Ramiro Medina-Gomez,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Northern District of Texas
                               USDC No. 3:20-CR-190-1
                      ______________________________

   Before Willett, Duncan, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          The attorney appointed to represent Ramiro Medina-Gomez 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). Medina-Gomez has filed a response, in which he challenges
   his guilty plea and sentence arguing, inter alia, that he pleaded guilty based

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-11150      Document: 00516884263           Page: 2     Date Filed: 09/05/2023

                                     No. 22-11150

   on counsel’s erroneous advice regarding the applicable guidelines range and
   that counsel failed to respond to his request to withdraw his guilty plea. The
   record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of
   Medina-Gomez’s claim that counsel failed to respond to his request to
   withdraw his guilty plea. We therefore decline to consider the claim without
   prejudice to it being raised on 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 Medina-Gomez’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