Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jaquale Laquindon CLARK, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-04-16
Citations: 546 F. App'x 332
Docket Number: No. 12-50362
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jaquale Laquindon CLARK, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 546
Pages: 332–332

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jaquale Laquindon CLARK, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 12-50362
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
April 16, 2013.
Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Jaquale Laquindon Clark, Bryan, TX, pro se.
Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The attorney appointed to represent Jaquale Laquindon Clark 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). Clark has filed a response. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Clark's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; such claims generally "cannot be resolved on direct appeal when [they have] 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 Clark'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. Clark's motion for the appointment of new counsel 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.