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

                                                 FILED
                                                                         December 15, 2009
                                     No. 08-11161
                                  Conference Calendar                  Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                               Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                   Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

LORENZO SCOTT,

                                                   Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Northern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 3:03-CR-262-1


Before KING, JOLLY, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
       The Attorney appointed to represent Lorenzo Scott has moved for leave to
withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S.
738 (1967). Scott has filed a response. The record is insufficiently developed to
allow consideration at this time of Scott’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. Cantwell,

       *
         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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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. 08-11161

470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and citation
omitted). Our independent review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Scott’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.




                                     2
