USA v. Lydia I. Cladek

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 13-13728
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 3:10-cr-00277-TJC-TEM-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
LYDIA I. CLADEK,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
________________________
(March 31, 2014)
Before PRYOR, MARTIN, and FAY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 13-13728 Date Filed: 03/31/2014 Page: 1 of 2

-- 1 of 2 --

2
Lydia Cladek appeals the district court’s denial of her pro se Federal Rule of
Criminal Procedure Rule 33 motion for a new trial. Maurice Grant, II, appointed
counsel for Cladek, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the
appellant in this appeal and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S.
738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967). Although Cladek argued in her Rule 33 motion and in
response to Grant’s Anders motion that counsel was ineffective, the record in this
case is insufficient to review counsel’s effectiveness. See United States v.
Franklin, 694 F.3d 1, 8–9 (11th Cir. 2012). Claims of ineffective assistance of
counsel should usually be raised in a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. United States v.
Curbelo, 726 F.3d 1260, 1267 (11th Cir. 2013).
Because our independent examination of the record reveals no arguable
issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the denial of
Cladek’s Rule 33 motion for a new trial is AFFIRMED. In addition, Cladek’s pro
se request for new counsel in this appeal is DENIED as moot, and Cladek’s
various other requests in this appeal for relief, also filed pro se, are DENIED.
Case: 13-13728 Date Filed: 03/31/2014 Page: 2 of 2

-- 2 of 2 --