Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Gerrod Travor ROBINSON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-04-30
Citations: 323 F. App'x 382
Docket Number: No. 08-10078
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Gerrod Travor ROBINSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and ELROD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 323
Pages: 382–382

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Gerrod Travor ROBINSON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 08-10078
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
April 30, 2009.
Gary C. Tromblay, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Michael F. Payne, Wichita Falls, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The attorney appointed to represent Gerrod Travor Robinson 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). Although Robinson was granted an extension of time in which to file a response, he has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel's brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of counsel's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; 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). 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.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.