Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Abraham MACIAS-OCHOA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-06-16
Citations: 607 F. App'x 387
Docket Number: No. 14-11036
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Abraham MACIAS-OCHOA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before DAVIS, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 607
Pages: 387–388

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Abraham MACIAS-OCHOA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-11036
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
June 16, 2015.
James Wesley Hendrix, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Kevin Joel Page, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Dallas, TX, Sherylynn Ann Kime-Goodwin, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Lubbock, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Abraham Macias-Ochoa, Lompoc, CA, pro se.
Before DAVIS, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Abraham Macias-Ochoa 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). Macias-Ochoa has filed responses. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Macias-Ochoa'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.), 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 Macias-Ochoa's responses. We concur with counsel's assessment that the appeal presents no non-frivolous 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.