Case: 15-10603      Document: 00513376570         Page: 1    Date Filed: 02/11/2016




           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT


                                    No. 15-10603
                                  Summary Calendar
                                                                         United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                  Fifth Circuit

                                                                                FILED
                                                                         February 11, 2016
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                                                                           Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk
                                                 Plaintiff–Appellee,

v.

TERRENCE JAVANCE SHELBY,

                                                 Defendant–Appellant.


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Northern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 5:14-CR-154-1


Before KING, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Terrence Javance
Shelby 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). Shelby has filed a response. The record is not
sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Shelby’s claim of
ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claim


       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 15-10603     Document: 00513376570    Page: 2   Date Filed: 02/11/2016


                                 No. 15-10603

without prejudice to collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 

,
841 (5th Cir. 2014).
      We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record
reflected therein, as well as Shelby’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