United States v. Raul Frias-Trujillo , 415 F. App'x 584 ( 2011 )

Case: 10-50418 Document: 00511405220 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/09/2011
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
March 9, 2011
No. 10-50418
Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
RAUL FRIAS-TRUJILLO,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 3:09-CR-2804-1
Before WIENER, PRADO, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The attorney appointed to represent Defendant-Appellant Raul Frias-
Trujillo (Frias) has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in
accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Frias has filed a
response. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this
time of Frias’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
*
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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: 10-50418 Document: 00511405220 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/09/2011
No. 10-50418
the allegations.” United States v. Cantwell, 470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir. 2006)
(internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
Included in Frias’s response is a pro se motion to file a pro se appellate
brief. This motion is unauthorized and untimely; accordingly, it is DENIED.
See United States v. Ogbonna, 184 F.3d 447, 449 & n.1 (5th Cir. 1999); United
States v. Wagner, 158 F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir. 1998).
Our independent review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Frias’s response
discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s 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