*1 Before KING, DENNIS, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: ^[*]

The attorney appointed to represent Cruz Diosdado Aranda 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). Diosdado Aranda has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Diosdado Aranda’s claims of *2 Case: 16-50106 Document: 00513936340 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/03/2017

No. 16-50106

ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider these claims. See United States v. Isgar , 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014). This denial is without prejudice to collateral review: Diosdado Aranda may raise any claims of ineffective assistance of counsel in a motion under 18 U.S.C. § 2255. See id.

We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Diosdado Aranda’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. However, we note that, if the imposition of forfeiture was a clerical error as counsel suggests, Diosdado Aranda may move the district court to correct the judgment. See F ED . R. C RIM . P. 36.

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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .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