     Case: 12-10113       Document: 00512120315         Page: 1     Date Filed: 01/22/2013




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

                                                                            FILED
                                                                         January 22, 2013
                                     No. 12-10113
                                   Summary Calendar                        Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                  Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JOHN RAY CHEEK,

                                                  Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Northern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 3:11-CR-157-1


Before SMITH, PRADO, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent John Ray Cheek 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). Cheek has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and
the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Cheek’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

       *
         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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 12-10113   Document: 00512120315    Page: 2   Date Filed: 01/22/2013

                               No. 12-10113

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




                                     2
