     Case: 10-50857 Document: 00511435047 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/05/2011




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

                                                 FILED
                                                                             April 5, 2011
                                     No. 10-50857
                                   Summary Calendar                         Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                 Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                   Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JOSE LUIS ORONA-CASTILLO,

                                                   Defendant-Appellant


                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Western District of Texas
                              USDC No. 4:04-CR-170-1


Before REAVLEY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
       The attorney appointed to represent Jose Luis Orona-Castillo has moved
for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Orona-Castillo has filed a response. The record
is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Orona-Castillo’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 of the

       *
         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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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: 10-50857 Document: 00511435047 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/05/2011

                                    No. 10-50857

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, and Orona-
Castillo’s response.   We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal
presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. 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. Orona-Castillo’s
request for appointment of counsel is DENIED. Cf. United States v. Wagner, 158
F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir. 1998).




                                         2
