United States v. Efrain Rivera-Matos

USCA11 Case: 24-10810 Document: 33-1 Date Filed: 02/14/2025 Page: 1 of 2

[DO NOT PUBLISH] In the

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________

No. 24-10810

Non-Argument Calendar ____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee, versus

EFRAIN RIVERA-MATOS,

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida

D.C. Docket No. 8:22-cr-00347-CEH-UAM-2 ____________________ USCA11 Case: 24-10810 Document: 33-1 Date Filed: 02/14/2025 Page: 2 of 2

2 Opinion of the Court 24-10810

Before JORDAN, ROSENBAUM, and LUCK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Justin Lighty, appointed counsel for Efrain Rivera-Matos in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). 1 Our independent review of the entire record reveals that Lighty’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, Lighty’s motion to withdraw on this basis is GRANTED, and Rivera-Matos’s con- viction and sentence are AFFIRMED.

1 Although Rivera-Matos did not file a response to counsel’s motion, his pro se notice of appeal included an allegation of ineffective assistance of counsel. To the extent that Rivera-Matos seeks to challenge his guilty plea based on inef- fective assistance, the current record is insufficiently developed to support such a claim, but Rivera-Matos may further develop a factual record as to this issue in a collateral attack under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. See Massaro v. United States, 538 U.S. 500, 504 (2003) (“[I]n most cases a motion brought under § 2255 is preferable to direct appeal for deciding claims of ineffective assistance.”).