*1 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: ^[*]

The attorney appointed to represent Alejandro Revilla-Guevara 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). Revilla-Guevara has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Revilla-Guevara’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claim *2 Case: 15-20643 Document: 00513721822 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/18/2016

No. 15-20643

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 Revilla-Guevara’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, Revilla-Guevara’s motion for the appointment of substitute counsel is DENIED, 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .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.