Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Barry Robert TURNER, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-04-21
Citations: 600 F. App'x 275
Docket Number: No. 13-11275
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Barry Robert TURNER, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 600
Pages: 275–276

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Barry Robert TURNER, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 13-11275
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
April 21, 2015.
James Wesley Hendrix, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Dallas, TX, Aisha Saleem, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Fort Worth, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Mark R. Danielson, Mansfield, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Barry Robert Turner, USP Tucson, Tucson, AZ, pro se.
Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The attorney appointed to represent Barry Robert Turner 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). Turner has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Turner's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claim without prejudice to collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 135 S.Ct. 123, 190 L.Ed.2d 94 (2014).
We have reviewed counsel's brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Turner'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, 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. collateral review.