Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Michael Harrison MATTHEWS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-03-22
Citations: 644 F. App'x 287
Docket Number: No. 15-40955
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Michael Harrison MATTHEWS, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before DAVIS, JONES, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 644
Pages: 287–288

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Michael Harrison MATTHEWS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-40955
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
March 22, 2016.
Milton Andrew Stover, Esq., U.S. Attorney’s Office, Plano, TX, for Plaintiff-Ap-pellee.
Robert Gerard Arrambide, Esq., Assistant Federal Public Defender, Office of the Federal Defender — Eastern District, Frisco, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before DAVIS, JONES, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Michael Harrison Matthews 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). Matthews, has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Matthews's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claim 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 Matthews's response. We concur with counsel's assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.