Case ID: f-appx_207/html/0476-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard R. MINDIOLA; William Bedford, Defendants-Appellants.
    No. 05-40811
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Dec. 1, 2006.
    Reynaldo Padillo Morin, US Attorney’s Office Eastern District of Texas, Lufkin, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Richard R. Mindiola, Seagoville, TX, pro se.
    Before DeMOSS, STEWART and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Richard R. Mindiola has moved for leave to withdraw from representation 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). Mindiola has not responded to counsel’s motion and brief. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief shows that there are no nonfrivolous issues for appeal.

Although counsel notes a possible ineffective assistance of counsel claim, as counsel concedes, the record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration of this claim on direct appeal. See United States v. Higdon, 832 F.2d 312, 313-14 (5th Cir.1987). Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and this APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.