     Case: 14-41010      Document: 00513192064         Page: 1    Date Filed: 09/14/2015




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

                                                                                   FILED
                                                                             September 14, 2015
                                    No. 14-41010
                                  Summary Calendar                              Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                     Clerk


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

NARCISO VALDEZ, also known as Ramon Torres Morales, also known as
Ramon Torres, also known as Chicho,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Eastern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 4:11-CR-196-2


Before DENNIS, PRADO, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Narciso Valdez 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).
Valdez has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow
us to make a fair evaluation of Valdez’s claims of ineffective assistance of



       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 14-41010     Document: 00513192064     Page: 2   Date Filed: 09/14/2015


                                  No. 14-41010

counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claims without prejudice to
collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir.), cert.
denied, 135 S. Ct. 123 (2014).
      We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record
reflected therein, as well as Valdez’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
