*1 Before JONES, WIENER, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: ^[*]

The attorney appointed to represent Bradley Smith 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). Smith has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Smith’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; *2 Case: 15-30665 Document: 00513704832 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/04/2016

No. 15-30665

we therefore decline to consider the 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 Smith’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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .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.