Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Brenda ROSALES, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-09-03
Citations: 581 F. App'x 373
Docket Number: No. 13-50680
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Brenda ROSALES, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 581
Pages: 373–373

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Brenda ROSALES, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 13-50680
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Sept. 3, 2014.
Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s- Office, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Brenda Rosales, Phoenix, AZ, pro se.
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Brenda Rosales 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). Although Rosales has not filed a response, she made allegations in her pro se notice of appeal that trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Rosales'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), petition for cert. filed (June 4, 2014) (No. 13-10484).
We have reviewed counsel's brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. 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 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.