     Case: 10-40702 Document: 00511501846 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/08/2011




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

                                                 FILED
                                                                            June 8, 2011
                                     No. 10-40702
                                   Summary Calendar                         Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                 Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                   Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

PHILLIP ROBINETTE,

                                                   Defendant-Appellant


                    Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Eastern District of Texas
                              USDC No. 4:09-CR-70-10


Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
       The attorney appointed to represent Phillip Robinette 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).
Robinette has filed a response. The record is insufficiently developed to allow
consideration at this time of Robinette’s claims of ineffective assistance of
counsel. See United States v. Cantwell, 470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir. 2006). We
have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected

       *
         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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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: 10-40702 Document: 00511501846 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/08/2011

                                 No. 10-40702

therein, as well as Robinette’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.




                                       2
