Skip to main content


Reset A A Font size: Print

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Richard Lee RAMOS, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 20-40057

Decided: February 15, 2021

Before King, Smith, and Wilson, Circuit Judges. John Richard Berry, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Carmen Castillo Mitchell, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney's Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff - Appellee Travis Wiley Berry, I, Esq., Attorney, Corpus Christi, TX, for Defendant - Appellant

Richard Lee Ramos pled guilty, pursuant to a written agreement, to conspiracy to transport aliens. He was sentenced to 120 months in prison, the statutory maximum and effective guidelines range. On appeal, Ramos argues first, that ineffective assistance of counsel rendered his guilty plea invalid, and second, that the district court erred when it increased his sentence for his supervisory role and denied him a reduction for accepting responsibility.

The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us fairly to evaluate Ramos's ineffective assistance of counsel claims. Therefore, we decline to consider them without prejudice to collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014). Further, on the record before us, Ramos has not shown that his waiver of his right to appeal his sentence is invalid, and his suggestion that his right to appeal his sentence was reinstated by the district court's comments at sentencing is unavailing. See United States v. Serrano-Lara, 698 F.3d 841, 843-45 (5th Cir. 2012); Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(1); see also United States v. De Leon, 915 F.3d 386, 390 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, ––– U.S. ––––, 139 S. Ct. 2731, 204 L.Ed.2d 1122 (2019); United States v. Miles, 10 F.3d 1135, 1140 (5th Cir. 1993).

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.



Per Curiam:* FN* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

Copied to clipboard