     Case: 13-10642      Document: 00512600399         Page: 1    Date Filed: 04/17/2014




           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT


                                    No. 13-10642
                                  Summary Calendar
                                                                         United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                  Fifth Circuit

                                                                                FILED
                                                                            April 17, 2014
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                                                                           Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk
                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JAMES CARROLL EASON, JR., also known as Jimbo,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Northern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 4:12-CR-93-2


Before DAVIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent James Carroll Eason, Jr., 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). Eason has filed a response. The record is insufficiently developed
to allow consideration at this time of Eason’s claim of ineffective assistance of
counsel; such a claim generally “cannot be resolved on direct appeal when the


       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 13-10642    Document: 00512600399     Page: 2   Date Filed: 04/17/2014


                                 No. 13-10642

claim has not been raised before the district 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). We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions
of the record reflected therein, as well as Eason’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 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. Eason’s motions to strike the Anders brief
and for appointment of new counsel are DENIED. See United States v. Wagner,
158 F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir. 1998).




                                        2
