     Case: 11-20701     Document: 00511963944         Page: 1     Date Filed: 08/21/2012




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

                                                                            FILED
                                                                          August 21, 2012
                                     No. 11-20701
                                  Conference Calendar                      Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                  Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

DANIEL PEREZ NEGRON, also known as Daniel Perez, also known as Daniel
Negron Perez, also known as Daniel Perez-Negron, also known as Raul
Gonzales,

                                                  Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 4:11-CR-328-1


Before SMITH, ELROD, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
        The attorney appointed to represent Daniel Perez Negron 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).
Negron has not filed a response and has been removed from the United States.
We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record


       *
         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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 11-20701    Document: 00511963944    Page: 2   Date Filed: 08/21/2012

                                No. 11-20701

reflected 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 in part as frivolous, see 5TH CIR.
R. 42.2, and in part as moot. See United States v. Rosenbaum-Alanis, 483 F.3d
381, 382-83 (5th Cir. 2007).




                                      2
