U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 2018

United States v. Raymond Tellez

United States v. Raymond Tellez
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Decided October 17, 2018

United States v. Raymond Tellez

Opinion

Case: 17-51104 Document: 00514685619 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/17/2018

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 17-51104 October 17, 2018 Conference Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. RAYMOND S. TELLEZ, also known as Raymond Simon Tellez, also known as Raymond Tellez, also known as Indio, also known as Pato, also known as Yeska, also known as Simon Tellez, Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:13-CR-468-1

Before DENNIS, CLEMENT, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Raymond S. Tellez 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).

Tellez has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Tellez’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel,

* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.

Case: 17-51104 Document: 00514685619 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/17/2018

No. 17-51104 to the extent that these claims are not barred by his appeal waiver; 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 Tellez’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.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.