     Case: 15-40558      Document: 00513627427         Page: 1    Date Filed: 08/08/2016




           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                                                                        United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                 Fifth Circuit
                                    No. 15-40558                               FILED
                                  Summary Calendar                        August 8, 2016
                                                                          Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                               Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

BILLY LANE,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Eastern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 4:13-CR-234-2


Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Billy Lane 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). Lane
has filed a response.       We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant
portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Lane’s response. We concur
with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for


       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 15-40558    Document: 00513627427     Page: 2   Date Filed: 08/08/2016


                                 No. 15-40558

appellate review.    We decline to consider Lane’s ineffective assistance of
counsel claims, without prejudice to his ability to assert such claims on
collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014).
      Accordingly, counsel’s 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
