
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Christopher Earl RYMAN, also known as Christopher Fred Ryman, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 13-10050
    Conference Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Dec. 17, 2013.
    James Wesley Hendrix, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Donald Robin McCarty, Law Office of D. Robin McCarty, Arlington, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before DAVIS, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

The attorney appointed to represent Christopher Earl Ryman 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). Ryman has filed responses. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Ryman’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; such a claim generally “cannot be resolved on direct appeal when the claim has 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 Ryman’s responses. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, the 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. Ryman’s motion to relieve counsel and appoint substitute 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       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
     