
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. April Lee MITCHELL, also known as Blacc, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 12-50540
    Conference Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    April 16, 2013.
    Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    April Lee Mitchell, pro se.
    
      Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

The attorney appointed to represent April Lee Mitchell 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), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir.2011). Mitchell has filed a response. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Mitchell’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). We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Mitchell’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. 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. Mitchell’s motion for the appointment of new counsel is DENIED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
     