Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Shawn Christopher WILSON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-12-10
Citations: 302 F. App'x 259
Docket Number: No. 08-10285
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Shawn Christopher WILSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 302
Pages: 259–259

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Shawn Christopher WILSON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 08-10285
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Dec. 10, 2008.
Jeffrey Robert Haag, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Lubbock, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Sherylynn Ann Kime-Goodwin, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Lubbock, TX, for Defendants Appellant.
Before DAVIS, WIENER, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Shawn Christopher Wilson 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). Wilson has filed a response. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Wilson'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 Wilson's response discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.