Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Gregory Darnell AKINS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-08-20
Citations: 290 F. App'x 705
Docket Number: No. 07-41152
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Gregory Darnell AKINS, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 290
Pages: 705–705

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Gregory Darnell AKINS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 07-41152
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Aug. 20, 2008.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Law Offices of J.T. Borah, Denton, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before GARZA, CLEMENT, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The attorney appointed to represent Gregory Darnell Akins 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). Akins has filed a response. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Akins'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). Our independent review of the record, counsel's brief, and Akins'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 Cíe. R. 42.2.
Akins's motions for appointment of new counsel and for transcripts are 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.