Court Opinion

ID: 8674729
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-25 01:28:32.740847+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:57:23.885655
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM: *
The attorney appointed to represent David Velasco 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). Velasco has filed a response. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Velasco’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 i’ecord 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 Velasco’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 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.