Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Deron Lamar GUILLORY, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-02-06
Citations: 675 F. App'x 499
Docket Number: No. 16-20277 Summary Calendar
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Deron Lamar GUILLORY, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before JOLLY, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 675
Pages: 499–499

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Deron Lamar GUILLORY, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 16-20277 Summary Calendar
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Filed February 6, 2017
Renata Ann Gowie, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee
Deron Lamar Guillory, Pro Se
Before JOLLY, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The attorney appointed to represent Deron Guillory 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). Guillory has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Guillory'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, relevant portions of the record reflected therein, and Guillory'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, Guillo-ry's motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED, 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.