United States v. Maldonado
United States v. Maldonado
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-41409 Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
TOMAS MALDONADO, SR.,
Defendant-Appellant.
-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. C-00-CR-234-1 -------------------- December 14, 2001 Before JONES, SMITH and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Court-appointed counsel representing Tomas Maldonado, Sr.,
has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief pursuant to
Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738(1967). Maldonado has filed a
pro se response to counsel’s Anders brief, asserting that he was
denied effective assistance of counsel because his sentencing
counsel failed to file an objection to the presentence report’s
recommendation of a consecutive sentence and failed to cite
U.S.S.G. § 5G1.3 in arguing for a concurrent sentence. The
record has not been adequately developed for us to consider in
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. No. 00-41409 -2-
this direct appeal the ineffective assistance claims raised by
Maldonado and his counsel. See United States v. Higdon,
832 F.2d 312, 314(5th Cir. 1987).
Our independent review of the record, counsel’s brief, and
Maldonado’s response shows that there are no nonfrivolous issues
for appeal. Consequently, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw
is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities
herein, the APPEAL IS DISMISSED, and Maldonado’s motion to
substitute counsel is DENIED AS MOOT. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished