United States v. Ramirez-Garcia

19-50957United States Court Of Appeals For The 5th CircuitMay 5, 2020

Full text

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-50957
Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

RODRIGO RAMIREZ-GARCIA,

Defendant-Appellant
************************************
Consolidated with 19-50958

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee
v.

RODRIGO RAMIREZ-GARCIA, also known as Rodrigo Rmz, also known as
Rodrigo Ramirez Garcia, also known as Rodrigo Garcia, also known as
Rodrigo Garcia-Ramirez,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 4:17-CR-99-6
USDC No. 4:19-CR-309-1

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
May 5, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
Case: 19-50957 Document: 00515405672 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/05/2020

No. 19-50957 c/w
No. 19-50958
2
Before HAYNES, DUNCAN, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Rodrigo Ramirez-
Garcia in this consolidated appeal 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). Ramirez-Garcia has not
filed a response. He did, however, execute a waiver of any challenge to his
conviction; accordingly, we conclude that his conviction is not before us and
will not address it further. See United States v. Garcia, 483 F.3d 289, 290-91
(5th Cir. 2007).
With respect to the revocation of his supervised release and his
sentences, we have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the
record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal
of the revocation and sentences 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 5
TH CIR. R. 42.2.

*
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5
TH
CIR. R. 47.5.4.
Case: 19-50957 Document: 00515405672 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/05/2020

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.