     Case: 12-41380       Document: 00512278585         Page: 1     Date Filed: 06/18/2013




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

                                                                            FILED
                                                                           June 18, 2013
                                     No. 12-41380
                                  Conference Calendar                      Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                  Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

RODOLFO HUERTA-MIRELES, true name Rodolfo Mireles Huerta,

                                                  Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 5:12-CR-635-1


Before JONES, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Rodolfo Huerta-
Mireles (Mireles) 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). Mireles has filed a response. The record
is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Mireles’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

       *
         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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 12-41380      Document: 00512278585   Page: 2   Date Filed: 06/18/2013

                                 No. 12-41380

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 Mireles’s response. We concur with counsel’s
assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review.
Accordingly, counsel’s 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
