USA v. Algenis Mendez-Quinones

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________

No. 20-10006
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________

D.C. Docket No. 8:19-cr-00020-VMC-AEP-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
ALGENIS MENDEZ-QUINONES,
Defendant - Appellant.
________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
________________________
(August 4, 2020)
Before WILSON, MARTIN, and JILL PRYOR, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:
Bryant Camareno, appointed counsel for Algenis Mendez-Quinones in this
direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of
Case: 20-10006 Date Filed: 08/04/2020 Page: 1 of 2

Mendez-Quinones and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738,
87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that
counsel’s assessment of the merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent
examination of the record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to
withdraw is GRANTED, and Mendez-Quinones’s conviction and sentence are
AFFIRMED.
1

1
Mendez-Quinones responded to Camareno’s motion to withdraw and expressed a desire
to bring a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel. “Except in the rare instance when the
record is sufficiently developed, we will not address claims for ineffective assistance of counsel
on direct appeal.” United States v. Verbitskaya, 406 F.3d 1324, 1337 (11th Cir. 2005). “Instead,
an ineffective assistance of counsel claim is properly raised in a collateral attack on the
conviction under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.” United States v. Merrill, 513 F.3d 1293, 1308 (11th Cir.
2008) (alteration adopted and quotation marks omitted). As the record in Mendez-Quinones’
case is not sufficiently developed at this stage, we express no view on the merits of his potential
ineffective assistance claim.
Case: 20-10006 Date Filed: 08/04/2020 Page: 2 of 2