Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Gary Eugene ROBINSON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-02-21
Citations: 555 F. App'x 449
Docket Number: No. 12-41274
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Gary Eugene ROBINSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before REAVLEY, OWEN, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 555
Pages: 449–450

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Gary Eugene ROBINSON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 12-41274
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Feb. 21, 2014.
Amanda Louise Griffith, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Plano, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Frank Warren Henderson, Esq., Assistant Federal Public Defender, Office of the Federal Defender, Frisco, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Gary Eugene Robinson, Sherman, TX, pro se.
Before REAVLEY, OWEN, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Federal Public Defénder appointed to represent Gary Eugene 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), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir.2011). Rob inson has filed a response. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Robinson's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; such claims 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). We have reviewed counsel's brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Robinson'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.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.