     Case: 18-60894      Document: 00515141579         Page: 1    Date Filed: 10/02/2019




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


                                    No. 18-60894                           FILED
                                 Conference Calendar                 October 2, 2019
                                                                      Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                           Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MANUEL PULIDO RODAS,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                     for the Southern District of Mississippi
                             USDC No. 1:18-CR-30-3


Before REAVLEY, ELROD, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Manuel Pulido Rodas 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).
Pulido Rodas 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 18-60894      Document: 00515141579   Page: 2   Date Filed: 10/02/2019


                                 No. 18-60894

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
