Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Eder Cledys RODRIGUEZ, also known as Shorty, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-08-22
Citations: 696 F. App'x 164
Docket Number: No. 16-20713 Summary Calendar
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Eder Cledys RODRIGUEZ, also known as Shorty, Defendant-Appellant
Judges: Before JOLLY, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 696
Pages: 164–165

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Eder Cledys RODRIGUEZ, also known as Shorty, Defendant-Appellant
No. 16-20713 Summary Calendar
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Filed August 22, 2017
Carmen Castillo Mitchell, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee
Eder Cledys Rodriguez, Pro Se
Before JOLLY, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The attorney appointed to represent Eder Cledys Rodriguez 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). Rodriguez has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider such 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 Rodriguez'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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.