Case: 13-20523 Document: 00512984624 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/27/2015
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
No. 13-20523 FILED
Summary Calendar March 27, 2015
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
OMAR QUIROZ-QUIROZ,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:04-CR-523
Before DAVIS, CLEMENT, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Omar Quiroz-Quiroz (Quiroz) appeals his guilty plea conviction of
conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of
cocaine. He argues that the district court erred by failing to order sua sponte
the withdrawal of his guilty plea based upon ineffective assistance of counsel.
Because Quiroz did not raise this issue below, review is for plain error.
See Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009). Quiroz presents no
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 13-20523 Document: 00512984624 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/27/2015
No. 13-20523
authority for the notion that a district court has a duty to order sua sponte the
withdrawal of a guilty plea. This court has declined to impose such a duty.
See, e.g., United States v. Abreo, 30 F.3d 29, 31 & n. 1 (5th Cir. 1994).
Quiroz fails to show a forfeited error that is clear or obvious. See Puckett,
556 U.S. at 135. Furthermore, he fails to demonstrate that the error, if any,
affected his substantial rights because the record reflects that Quiroz was fully
informed and understood that there was no guarantee that the safety valve
would apply to him. Id.
Contrary to Quiroz’s contention, the record is not sufficiently developed
to allow this court to address his ineffective assistance of counsel claims on
direct appeal. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir.), cert.
denied, 135 S. Ct. 123 (2014). Accordingly, the judgment is AFFIRMED.
2