     Case: 17-51127      Document: 00514591194         Page: 1    Date Filed: 08/08/2018




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

                                                                                 FILED
                                    No. 17-51127                            August 8, 2018
                                 Conference Calendar
                                                                            Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                 Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

CASY FRAZEE,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                  Appeals from the United States District Court
                        for the Western District of Texas
                            USDC No. 7:17-CR-153-1


Before KING, ELROD, and WILLETT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Casy Frazee 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).
Frazee has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant
portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Frazee’s response.




       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 17-51127    Document: 00514591194     Page: 2      Date Filed: 08/08/2018


                                 No. 17-51127

      The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair
evaluation of Frazee’s claims of ineffective assistance of 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. 2014).
      We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no
nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. 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
