*1 Before JOLLY, PRADO, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: [*]
The attorney appointed to represent Jerry Ware 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). Ware has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Ware’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; we *2 Case: 16-11077 Document: 00513882344 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/21/2017
No. 16-11077
therefore decline to consider the claim 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 parts of the record reflected therein, as well as Ware’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 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2.
2
[*] Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.