     Case: 16-41430      Document: 00514065896         Page: 1    Date Filed: 07/10/2017




           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                                                                           United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                    Fifth Circuit

                                    No. 16-41430                                  FILED
                                  Summary Calendar                            July 10, 2017
                                                                             Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                  Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ANTONIO ORTEGA-MENDEZ,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 1:16-CR-538-1


Before HIGGINBOTHAM, PRADO, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Antonio Ortega-
Mendez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance
with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632
F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Ortega-Mendez has filed a response. The record is
not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Ortega-
Mendez’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to


       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
    Case: 16-41430    Document: 00514065896     Page: 2   Date Filed: 07/10/2017


                                 No. 16-41430

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 Ortega-Mendez’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.




                                       2
