The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Arturo Rico-Espinoza has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Rico-Espinoza has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Rico-Espinoza’s •claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claim ■without prejudice to collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014).

We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Rico-Espinoza’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivo-lous issue for appellate review'. Accordingly, the motion for1 leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5tS Cir. R. 42.2. Rico-Espinoza’s motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED.