Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Roberto Carlos SOSA-RIVERA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-06-21
Citations: 653 F. App'x 282
Docket Number: No. 15-41430
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Roberto Carlos SOSA-RIVERA, Defendant-Appellant
Judges: Before JONES,. CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 653
Pages: 282–283

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Roberto Carlos SOSA-RIVERA, Defendant-Appellant
No. 15-41430
Conference Calendar
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Date Filed: 06/21/2016
Renata Ann Gowie, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Roberto Carlos Sosa-Rivera, Three Rivers, TX, Pro Se.
Before JONES,. CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Roberto Carlos Sosa-Rivera has moved for leave to withdraw and has . filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Sosa-Rivera has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Sosa-Rivera's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; 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 Sosa-Rivera's response. We concur with counsel's assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivo-lous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, Sosa-Rivera's request for new appointed counsel is DENIED, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.