     Case: 10-60788     Document: 00511915148         Page: 1     Date Filed: 07/10/2012




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

                                                                            FILED
                                                                            July 10, 2012
                                     No. 10-60788
                                   Summary Calendar                        Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                  Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

QUAWI GATES, also known as Red,

                                                  Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                     for the Northern District of Mississippi
                             USDC No. 3:09-CR-112-1


Before KING, JOLLY, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
        The attorney appointed to represent Quawi Gates 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). Gates has
filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of
the record reflected therein, as well as Gates’s response. 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,

       *
         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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 10-60788   Document: 00511915148   Page: 2   Date Filed: 07/10/2012

                              No. 10-60788

counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS
DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.




                                    2
