Case: 13-40084      Document: 00512473068         Page: 1    Date Filed: 12/17/2013




           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT


                                    No. 13-40084
                                 Conference Calendar
                                                                         United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                  Fifth Circuit

                                                                                FILED
                                                                        December 17, 2013
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                                                                           Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk
                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

SANTOS RODRIGUEZ-RIOS, also known as Juan Miguel Sosa, also known as
Jorge Ambriz Garcia,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Eastern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 4:11-CR-6-6


Before DAVIS, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Santos Rodriguez-Rios (Rodriguez)
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). Rodriguez has filed a response. The record is insufficiently
developed to allow consideration at this time of Rodriguez’s claim of ineffective



       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 13-40084   Document: 00512473068    Page: 2   Date Filed: 12/17/2013


                               No. 13-40084

assistance of counsel; such a claim generally “cannot be resolved on direct
appeal when the 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, 

, 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 Rodriguez’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