     Case: 13-41267      Document: 00512745333         Page: 1    Date Filed: 08/25/2014




           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                                                                          United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                   Fifth Circuit

                                                                                 FILED
                                    No. 13-41267                           August 25, 2014
                                  Summary Calendar
                                                                            Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                 Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff–Appellee

v.

HECTOR SAUCEDO-ESPINOZA,

                                                 Defendant–Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                            USDC No. 5:09-CR-1435-1


Before PRADO, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Hector Saucedo-
Espinoza 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). Saucedo-Espinoza has not filed a response. We have
reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected
therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no


       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
    Case: 13-41267    Document: 00512745333     Page: 2   Date Filed: 08/25/2014


                                 No. 13-41267

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.




                                       2
