Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Francisco JARAMILLO-GONZALEZ, also known as Francisco Javier Jaramillo, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-06-22
Citations: 134 F. App'x 764
Docket Number: No. 04-10501
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Francisco JARAMILLO-GONZALEZ, also known as Francisco Javier Jaramillo, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 134
Pages: 764–764

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Francisco JARAMILLO-GONZALEZ, also known as Francisco Javier Jaramillo, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 04-10501.
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Decided June 22, 2005.
Aisha Saleem, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Dallas, TX, Renee Harris Toliver, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Francisco Jaramillo-Gonzalez, Edgefield, SC, pro se.
Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Court-appointed counsel for Francisco Jaramillo-Gonzalez has requested leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Jaramillo-Gonzalez was informed of counsel's motion but did not file a response. Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. We have not considered on its merits Jaramillo-Gonzalez's allegation of ineffective assistance of counsel because the record is not adequately developed. See United States v. Higdon, 832 F.2d 312, 313-14 (5th Cir.1987).
Without prejudice to Jaramillo-Gonzalez's right to file a motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.