     Case: 09-31079 Document: 00511292054 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/12/2010




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

                                                 FILED
                                                                         November 12, 2010
                                     No. 09-31079
                                   Summary Calendar                         Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                 Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                   Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

STEVEN R HANSEN,

                                                   Defendant-Appellant


                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                       for the Eastern District of Louisiana
                              USDC No. 2:09-CR-5-1


Before KING, BENAVIDES, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Steven R. Hansen has
moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Hansen has filed a response. The record is
insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Hansen’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.”

       *
         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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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: 09-31079 Document: 00511292054 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/12/2010

                                  No. 09-31079

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 Hansen’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
