Case: 14-41228      Document: 00513166628         Page: 1    Date Filed: 08/24/2015




           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT


                                    No. 14-41228
                                  Summary Calendar
                                                                         United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                  Fifth Circuit

                                                                                FILED
                                                                          August 24, 2015
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                                                                           Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk
                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ROBERTO VELIZ,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 2:14-CR-105-1


Before KING, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Roberto Veliz has moved for leave
to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 

(1967), and United States v. Flores, 

(5th Cir. 2011). Veliz
has filed a response. To the extent Veliz may be deemed to argue that appellate
counsel was ineffective, the record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to
make a fair evaluation of Veliz’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; we


       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 14-41228     Document: 00513166628     Page: 2   Date Filed: 08/24/2015


                                  No. 14-41228

therefore decline to consider the claim without prejudice to collateral review.
See United States v. Isgar, 

, 841 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 

(2014).
      We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record
reflected therein, as well as Veliz’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