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

                                                 FILED
                                                                            April 30, 2009
                                     No. 08-40756
                                  Conference Calendar                  Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                               Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

                                                   Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

RAMADAN TAJEDEEN SHABAZZ

                                                   Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Eastern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 6:07-CR-87-1


Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and ELROD, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Ramadan Tajedeen
Shabazz has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance
with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Shabazz has filed a response.
The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of
Shabazz’s claim 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

       *
         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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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. 08-40756

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, counsel’s brief, and Shabazz’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.




                                        2
