*1 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, PRADO, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: ^[*]

The attorney appointed to represent Roberto Aguilar has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed briefs in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Aguilar has filed a response as well as a motion to appoint new counsel. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Aguilar’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to *2 Case: 16-10402 Document: 00514112171 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/11/2017

No. 16-10402

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 briefs and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Aguilar’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s 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. Because the appeal is frivolous, Aguilar’s motion to appoint new counsel is DENIED.

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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .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