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

                                                 FILED
                                                                            June 16, 2009
                                     No. 08-20424
                                  Conference Calendar                  Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                               Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

                                                   Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JAVIER BOTELLO-GARCIA

                                                   Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 4:07-CR-370-1


Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
       The attorney appointed to represent Javier Botello-Garcia has moved for
leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967). Botello-Garcia has filed a response. Our independent
review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Botello-Garcia’s response discloses no
nonfrivolous issue for appeal. The record is insufficiently developed to allow
consideration at this time of Botello-Garcia’s claims of ineffective assistance of
counsel; such claims generally “cannot be resolved on direct appeal when [they

       *
         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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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.
                                 No. 08-20424

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). Accordingly, counsel’s 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
