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

                                                 FILED
                                                                           August 18, 2009
                                     No. 08-41363
                                  Conference Calendar                  Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                               Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                   Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

DWAYNE CHANDLER,

                                                   Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Eastern District of Texas
                            USDC No. 4:07-CR-246-16


Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
       The attorney appointed to represent Dwayne Chandler has moved for
leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967). Chandler has filed a response. The record is insufficiently
developed to allow consideration at this time of Chandler’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.

       *
         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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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. 08-41363

Cantwell, 470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and
citation omitted). Our independent review of the record, counsel’s brief, and
Chandler’s response discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. 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.
      Chandler’s motion for appointment of substitute counsel is DENIED.




                                       2
