U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 2009

United States v. Lee

United States v. Lee
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Decided June 16, 2009 · Benavides, Haynes, Smith
326 F. App'x 812

United States v. Lee

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM: *

*813The attorney appointed to represent Jamón Earl James Lee has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Lee has filed a response. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Lee’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. Cantwell, 470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Our independent review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Lee’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 5th CiR. R. 42.2. Lee’s motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED.

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be *813published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.