Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Rosalio GONZALEZ-HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-04-17
Citations: 469 F. App'x 396
Docket Number: No. 11-41049
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Rosalio GONZALEZ-HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 469
Pages: 396–397

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Rosalio GONZALEZ-HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 11-41049
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
April 17, 2012.
Renata Ann Gowie, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Molly Estelle Odom, Esq., Assistant Federal Public Defender, H. Michael Sokolow, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Houston, TX, for DefendanL-Appellant.
Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Rosalio Gonzalez-Hernandez 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). Gonza lez-Hernandez has filed a response. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Gonzalez-Hernandez's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; such claims generally "cannot be resolved on direct appeal when the claim[s] [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). We have reviewed counsel's brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Gonzalez-Hernandez'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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.