     Case: 18-40695      Document: 00514842554         Page: 1    Date Filed: 02/20/2019




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

                                    No. 18-40695                         FILED
                                 Conference Calendar              February 20, 2019
                                                                    Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                         Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

RAMIRO HERNANDEZ, JR.,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 5:17-CR-832-1


Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Ramiro Hernandez, Jr., 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). Hernandez 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


       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 18-40695    Document: 00514842554    Page: 2   Date Filed: 02/20/2019


                                No. 18-40695

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
