DocketNumber： 15-10155
Citation Numbers： 695 F. App'x 811
Filed Date： 8/18/2017
Status： Non-Precedential
Modified Date： 1/13/2023
Case: 15-10155 Document: 00514121281 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/18/2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals No. 15-10155 Fifth Circuit FILED Conference Calendar August 18, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Clerk Plaintiff-Appellee v. ALEJANDRO GUERRERO-AGUILAR, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:14-CR-118-1 Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Alejandro Guerrero-Aguilar has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California,386 U.S. 738
(1967), and United States v. Flores,632 F.3d 229
(5th Cir. 2011). Guerrero-Aguilar filed a response to his prior appellate attorney’s motion to withdraw pursuant to Anders, but that motion was later withdrawn when new counsel was appointed. Guerrero-Aguilar has not filed a response * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 15-10155 Document: 00514121281 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/18/2017 No. 15-10155 to his new counsel’s motion. Insofar as Guerrero-Aguilar’s response raises claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, the record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of those claims. We therefore decline to consider these claims without prejudice to collateral review. See United States v. Isgar,739 F.3d 829
, 841 (5th Cir. 2014). We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Guerrero-Aguilar’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. 2