
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Lynn SMIRL, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 07-10888
    Conference Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Aug. 20, 2008.
    Camille Elizabeth Sparks, U.S. Attorney’s Office Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Mark R. Danielson, Mansfield, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before GARZA, CLEMENT, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

The attorney appointed to represent Lynn Smirl 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). Smirl has filed a response. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of SmiiTs claim 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 Smirl’s response discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, his motion for the appointment of substitute counsel is DENIED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
     