Case: 19-10752      Document: 00515327454         Page: 1    Date Filed: 03/02/2020




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

                                                                                FILED
                                    No. 19-10752                            March 2, 2020
                                 Conference Calendar
                                                                           Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ENCARNACION HURTADO-CRUZ, also known as “Pancho,”

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Northern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 4:17-CR-194-2


Before JONES, HIGGINSON, and WILLETT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Encarnacion Hurtado-Cruz 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). Hurtado-Cruz has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently
developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Hurtado-Cruz’s claims of
ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claims


       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 19-10752     Document: 00515327454    Page: 2   Date Filed: 03/02/2020


                                 No. 19-10752

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 Hurtado-Cruz’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