*1 Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: [*]
The attorney appointed to represent Francisco Manuel Radamez-Nava has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Radamez-Nava has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected *2 Case: 16-11366 Document: 00514121377 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/18/2017
No. 16-11366
therein. 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 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2.
2
[*] Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.