United States v. Altman ( 2021 )


Menu:
  • Case: 20-10627     Document: 00515892897         Page: 1     Date Filed: 06/09/2021
    United States Court of Appeals
    for the Fifth Circuit                            United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    June 9, 2021
    No. 20-10627
    Lyle W. Cayce
    Summary Calendar                           Clerk
    United States of America,
    Plaintiff—Appellee,
    versus
    Ryder Shane Altman,
    Defendant—Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Northern District of Texas
    USDC No. 1:19-CR-72-1
    Before Clement, Higginson, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
    Per Curiam:*
    Ryder Shane Altman pleaded guilty, pursuant to a plea agreement, to
    distribution of child pornography and was sentenced to 192 months of
    imprisonment, to be served consecutively to Altman’s anticipated probation
    revocation for a prior state court pornography conviction. He argues on
    *
    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    opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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.
    Case: 20-10627      Document: 00515892897           Page: 2     Date Filed: 06/09/2021
    No. 20-10627
    appeal that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to object
    to the presentence report’s reference to application note 4(C) to U.S.S.G.
    § 5G1.3. He further contends that the district court abused its discretion in
    not granting his motion to continue his sentencing hearing so that he could
    obtain a mitigation expert.
    The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair
    evaluation of Altman’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; we
    therefore decline to consider the claim without prejudice to collateral review.
    See United States v. Isgar, 
    739 F.3d 829
    , 841 (5th Cir. 2014). Altman’s appeal
    waiver, which the Government invokes, bars his challenge to the denial of his
    motion for a continuance. See United States v. Story, 
    439 F.3d 226
    , 231 (5th
    Cir. 2006); United States v. Bond, 
    414 F.3d 542
    , 544 (5th Cir. 2005).
    Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 20-10627

Filed Date: 6/9/2021

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 6/9/2021