Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Ernie TARANGO, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-09-10
Citations: 488 F. App'x 801
Docket Number: No. 12-40272
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Ernie TARANGO, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before HIGGINBOTHAM, OWEN, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 488
Pages: 801–802

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Ernie TARANGO, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 12-40272
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Sept. 10, 2012.
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, OWEN, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The attorney appointed to represent Ernie Tarango 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). Tarango has filed a response. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Taran-go's claim of ineffective assistance of coun sel; such a claim generally "cannot be resolved on direct appeal when the claim has not been raised before the district court since no opportunity existed to develop the record on the merits of the allegations." United States v. Cantwell, 470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir.2006) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). We have reviewed counsel's brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Tarango's response. We concur with counsel's assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel'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. Furthermore, Tarango's motion to have new counsel appointed is DENIED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.