UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Patrick A. WRIGHT, Defendant-Appellant, 203 F. App'x 648

PER CURIAM: The attorney appointed to represent Patrick A. Wright 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). Wright filed a response in which he alleges that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to fairly evaluate the merits of this issue. Therefore, it is not reviewable on direct appeal. See United States v. Higdon, 832 F.2d 312, 313-14 (5th Cir.1987).

Our independent review of counsel’s brief, Wright’s response, and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issues 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. Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, 'the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.