                                                                        United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                 Fifth Circuit
                                                                               F I L E D
           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                              August 21, 2007
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                                                                           Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                                   Clerk
                                     No. 05-10645
                                  Conference Calendar


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

                                                  Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

LESLIE REDMOND

                                                  Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Northern District of Texas
                           USDC No. 3:03-CR-377-ALL


Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
       The attorney appointed to represent Leslie Redmond has moved for leave
to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386
U.S. 738 (1967). Redmond has filed a response. The record is insufficiently
developed to allow consideration at this time of Redmond’s claims of ineffective
assistance of counsel. See United States v. Cantwell, 470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th
Cir. 2006). Our independent review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Redmond’s
response discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, the motion for

       *
         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 R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 05-10645

leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities
herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.




                                      2
