The attorney appointed to represent William A. Jewell 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). Jewell has filed a response. To the extent Jewell complains of his counsel’s performance, the record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of any claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider such a 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 Jewell’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. Jewell’s belated motions to view sealed documents and to file an out-of-time supplemental response to the An-ders brief are DENIED. All other motions are DENIED.