Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Edward Leon KAVANAUGH, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-08-25
Citations: 614 F. App'x 216
Docket Number: No. 14-50310
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Edward Leon KAVANAUGH, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before DAVIS, JONES, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 614
Pages: 216–217

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Edward Leon KAVANAUGH, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-50310
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Aug. 25, 2015.
Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Russell David Hunt, Jr., Georgetown, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Edward Leon Kavanaugh, Forrest City, AR, pro se.
Before DAVIS, JONES, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The attorney appointed to represent Edward Leon Kavanaugh 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). Kavanaugh has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Kavanaugh'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 Kavanaugh's response. 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, the APPEAL IS DISMISSED, and Kavanaugh's request for new appointed counsel is DENIED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2; United States v. Wagner, 158 F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir.1998).
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir R. 47.5.4.