Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Sergio GALVAN-PUENTE, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-09-16
Citations: 668 F. App'x 624
Docket Number: No. 16-40197 Summary Calendar
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Sergio GALVAN-PUENTE, Defendant-Appellant
Judges: Before JONES, WIENER, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 668
Pages: 624–625

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Sergio GALVAN-PUENTE, Defendant-Appellant
No. 16-40197 Summary Calendar
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Date Filed: 09/16/2016
Renata Ann Gowie, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Sergio Galvan-Puente, Pro Se.
Before JONES, WIENER, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Sergio Galvan-Puente 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). Gal-van-Puente has filed a response.
We have reviewed counsel's brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Galvan-Puente's response. Although Galvan-Puente signed a document entitled "Decision Regarding My Appeal," in which he stated that he wished to appeal only his sentence, we have reviewed the validity of both the conviction and sentence. We concur with counsel's assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review.
The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Galvan-Puente's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel unrelated to the "Decision Regarding My Appeal"; we therefore decline to consider those claims without prejudice to collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014).
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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.