Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Fidel MENDEZ-HERNANDEZ, also known as Fidel Mendez Hernandez, Defendant-Appellant; United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Fidel Mendez-Hernandez, also known as Miguel Mendez Hernandez, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-05-02
Citations: 689 F. App'x 232
Docket Number: No. 16-51127 Cons. w/ No. 16-51129 Summary Calendar
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Fidel MENDEZ-HERNANDEZ, also known as Fidel Mendez Hernandez, Defendant-Appellant United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Fidel Mendez-Hernandez, also known as Miguel Mendez Hernandez, Defendant-Appellant
Judges: Before JONES, WIENER, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 689
Pages: 232–233

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Fidel MENDEZ-HERNANDEZ, also known as Fidel Mendez Hernandez, Defendant-Appellant United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Fidel Mendez-Hernandez, also known as Miguel Mendez Hernandez, Defendant-Appellant
No. 16-51127 Cons. w/ No. 16-51129 Summary Calendar
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Filed May 2, 2017
Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee
Fidel Mendez-Hernandez, Pro Se
Before JONES, WIENER, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Fidel Mendez-Hernandez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. Calif ornia, 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). Mendez-Hernandez has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Mendez-Hernandez'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. 2014).
We have reviewed counsel's brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Mendez-Hernandez's response. We concur with counsel's assessment that the appeals present no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEALS ARE 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.