Court Opinion

ID: 204801
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2011-02-15 18:33:30+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:27:45.835415
License: Public Domain

Case: 10-20277 Document: 00511382451 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/15/2011

           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT  United States Court of Appeals
                                                    Fifth Circuit

                                                 FILED
                                                                          February 15, 2011
                                     No. 10-20277
                                  Conference Calendar                       Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                 Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                   Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

WILLIAM LEROY FERGUSON,

                                                   Defendant-Appellant

                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Southern District of Texas
                              USDC No. 4:09-CR-604-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, GARZA, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent William Leroy
Ferguson has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance
with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Ferguson has filed a response.
The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of
Ferguson’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; such a claim 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

       *
         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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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.
    Case: 10-20277 Document: 00511382451 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/15/2011

                                 No. 10-20277

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 Ferguson’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 5 TH C IR. R. 42.2.

                                       2