Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Santos SALINAS, also known as Tito, also known as Santos Salinas, Jr., Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-12-20
Citations: 672 F. App'x 395
Docket Number: No. 16-50013 Conference Calendar
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Santos SALINAS, also known as Tito, also known as Santos Salinas, Jr., Defendant-Appellant
Judges: Before DENNIS, PRADO, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 672
Pages: 395–395

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Santos SALINAS, also known as Tito, also known as Santos Salinas, Jr., Defendant-Appellant
No. 16-50013 Conference Calendar
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Date Filed: 12/20/2016
Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee
Santos Salinas, Pro Se
Before DENNIS, PRADO, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The attorney appointed to represent Santos Salinas 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). Salinas has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Salinas's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider them without prejudice to collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014). The motion for appointment of substitute counsel is DENIED as untimely. See United States v. Wagner, 158 F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir. 1998).
We have reviewed counsel's brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Salinas'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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.