     Case: 11-40241     Document: 00511893866         Page: 1     Date Filed: 06/20/2012




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

                                                                            FILED
                                                                           June 20, 2012
                                     No. 11-40241
                                   Summary Calendar                        Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                  Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JUAN MANUEL ROJAS, JR.,

                                                  Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 2:10-CR-884-1


Before KING, JOLLY, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
        The attorney appointed to represent Juan Manuel Rojas, Jr., has moved
for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th
Cir. 2011). Rojas has filed a response and a motion to remove appointed counsel,
Joel H. Thomas, and to appoint new counsel. To the extent that Rojas raises a
claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, the record is insufficiently developed
to allow consideration at this time of Rojas’s claim; such a claim generally

       *
         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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 11-40241    Document: 00511893866      Page: 2   Date Filed: 06/20/2012

                                  No. 11-40241

“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
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 Rojas’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal
presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Rojas’s motion is DENIED.
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.




                                        2
