     Case: 10-10255     Document: 00511640032         Page: 1     Date Filed: 10/21/2011




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

                                                                            FILED
                                                                         October 21, 2011
                                     No. 10-10255
                                  Conference Calendar                      Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                  Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

AKBAR MALIK MUHAMMAD,

                                                  Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Northern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 3:08-CR-338-2


Before BENAVIDES, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
        The attorney appointed to represent Akbar Malik Muhammad 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). Muhammad has responded only to the extent of requesting new
counsel. 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 nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s

       *
         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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 10-10255   Document: 00511640032   Page: 2   Date Filed: 10/21/2011

                               No. 10-10255

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.
Muhammad’s request for new appointed counsel is DENIED.




                                    2
