     Case: 12-40272     Document: 00511980962         Page: 1     Date Filed: 09/10/2012




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

                                                                            FILED
                                                                        September 10, 2012
                                     No. 12-40272
                                   Summary Calendar                        Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                  Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ERNIE TARANGO,

                                                  Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Eastern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 4:10-CR-248-3


Before HIGGINBOTHAM, OWEN, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
        The attorney appointed to represent Ernie Tarango 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).
Tarango has filed a response. The record is insufficiently developed to allow
consideration at this time of Tarango’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

       *
         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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 12-40272   Document: 00511980962     Page: 2   Date Filed: 09/10/2012

                                 No. 12-40272

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 Tarango’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. Furthermore, Tarango’s motion to have new counsel appointed is
DENIED.




                                       2
