*1 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: ^[*]

The attorney appointed to represent Michael Cornelious 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). Cornelious has filed a response, as well as a motion to substitute counsel. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Cornelious’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment *2 Case: 17-20020 Document: 00514231196 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/09/2017

No. 17-20020

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 Cornelious’s motion to substitute is DENIED AS UNNECESSARY. 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .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.