     Case: 19-40118      Document: 00515245306         Page: 1    Date Filed: 12/20/2019




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

                                    No. 19-40118
                                                                              Fifth Circuit

                                                                            FILED
                                 Conference Calendar                December 20, 2019
                                                                       Lyle W. Cayce
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                                                   Clerk


                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

LEROY HILLS, also known as Sporty,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Eastern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 1:17-CR-154-9


Before SMITH, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Leroy Hills 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).
Hills 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 nonfrivolous issue for appellate review.


       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 19-40118      Document: 00515245306   Page: 2   Date Filed: 12/20/2019


                                 No. 19-40118

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
