     Case: 09-30480     Document: 00511150362          Page: 1    Date Filed: 06/22/2010




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

                                                 FILED
                                                                            June 22, 2010
                                     No. 09-30480
                                  Conference Calendar                       Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                 Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                   Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

SABINA LUNA VALDEZ,

                                                   Defendant-Appellant


                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                       for the Western District of Louisiana
                            USDC No. 6:06-CR-60074-8


Before JOLLY, STEWART, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
        The attorney appointed to represent Sabina Luna Valdez has moved for
leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967). Valdez has filed a response. The record is insufficiently
developed to allow consideration at this time of Valdez’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.” United States v.

       *
         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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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: 09-30480   Document: 00511150362 Page: 2       Date Filed: 06/22/2010
                               No. 09-30480

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
Valdez’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 5 TH C IR.
R. 42.2. Valdez’s motion for appointment of substitute counsel is DENIED. Cf.
United States v. Wagner, 158 F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir. 1998).




                                      2
