The Federal Public Defender (FPD) appointed to represent Carlos Enrique Leiva 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). Leiva has filed a response and moves for the appointment of new counsel. Although Leiva’s response raises claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, those claims were not presented before the district court. We therefore decline to consider the claims without prejudice to Leiva’s ability to raise the claims on collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 135 S.Ct. 123, 190 L.Ed.2d 94 (2014).

We have reviewed, counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Leiva’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, Leiva’s pro se motion for the appointment of new counsel is DENIED, the FPD’s 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.