Case: 09-40707     Document: 00511064076          Page: 1    Date Filed: 03/26/2010




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

                                                  FILED
                                                                           March 26, 2010
                                     No. 09-40707
                                   Summary Calendar                    Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                               Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                   Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

GERARDO RAFAEL PEREZ,

                                                   Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 5:09-CR-356-1


Before KING, STEWART and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
        The attorney appointed to represent Gerardo Rafael Perez has moved for
leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California,

(1967). Perez has filed a response. The record is insufficiently
developed to allow consideration at this time of Perez’s claims 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 the allegations.” United States v.

        *
         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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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: 09-40707    Document: 00511064076 Page: 2         Date Filed: 03/26/2010
                                No. 09-40707

Cantwell, 

, 1091 (5th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and
citation omitted). Our independent review of the record, counsel’s brief, and
Perez’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.
Perez’s motion for the appointment of substitute counsel is DENIED. Cf. United
States v. Wagner, 

, 902-03 (5th Cir. 1998).




                                      2