Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jesus GILBERTO LOPEZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-09-28
Citations: 616 F. App'x 194
Docket Number: No. 15-10172
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jesus GILBERTO LOPEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before DAVIS, JONES, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 616
Pages: 194–195

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jesus GILBERTO LOPEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-10172
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Sept. 28, 2015.
James Wesley Hendrix, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Monica F. Markley, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Fort Worth, TX, Douglas Anthony Morris, Esq., Federal Public Defender’s Office, Dallas, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before DAVIS, JONES, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jesus Gilberto Lopez 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). Gil berto Lopez has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Gilberto Lopez'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 Gilberto Lopez's response. We concur with counsel's assessment that the appeal presents no non-frivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel's 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.