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

                                                 FILED
                                                                          February 18, 2009
                                     No. 05-30859
                                  Conference Calendar                  Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                               Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

                                                   Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

CHARLES GILLESPIE

                                                   Defendant-Appellant


                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                       for the Western District of Louisiana
                            USDC No. 5:04-CR-50170-5


Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
       The attorney appointed to represent Charles Gillespie has moved for leave
to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386
U.S. 738 (1967). Gillespie has not filed a response to the Anders motion but did
bring claims of ineffective assistance of counsel to this court’s attention. The
record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Gillespie’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

       *
         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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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. 05-30859

court 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). Our independent review of the
record and counsel’s brief 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
