Case: 13-20108       Document: 00512419999         Page: 1     Date Filed: 10/25/2013




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

                                                                            FILED
                                                                         October 25, 2013
                                     No. 13-20108
                                  Conference Calendar                      Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                  Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JUAN ANGEL BARRAZA-VARGAS, also known as Juan Angel Barraza Vargas,

                                                  Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 4:12-CR-586-1


Before JOLLY, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Juan Angel Barraza-
Vargas has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with
Anders v. California, 

 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 

 (5th Cir. 2011). Barraza-Vargas has filed a response.                    The record is
insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Barraza-Vargas’s
claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; such a claim generally “cannot be
resolved on direct appeal when the claim has not been raised before the district

       *
         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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 13-20108   Document: 00512419999     Page: 2   Date Filed: 10/25/2013

                                No. 13-20108

court since no opportunity existed to develop the record on the merits of the
allegations.” United States v. Cantwell, 

, 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
Barraza-Vargas’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.




                                     2