Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Olbin Yovany ARANDA-HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-06-24
Citations: 335 F. App'x 421
Docket Number: No. 08-11004
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Olbin Yovany ARANDA-HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 335
Pages: 421–422

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Olbin Yovany ARANDA-HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 08-11004
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
June 24, 2009.
Amanda R. Burch, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Lubbock, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Travis Sandoval, Lubbock, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The attorney appointed to represent Ol-bin Yovany Aranda-Hernandez (Aranda) 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). Aranda has filed a response. .The record is insufficiently de veloped to allow consideration at this time of Aranda's claim 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). Our independent review of the record, counsel's brief, and Aranda's response discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. 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. Aranda'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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.