     Case: 14-41073      Document: 00513080055         Page: 1    Date Filed: 06/16/2015




           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT


                                    No. 14-41073
                                 Conference Calendar
                                                                         United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                  Fifth Circuit

                                                                                FILED
                                                                            June 16, 2015
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                                                                           Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk
                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

PAULO OSIEL MONTOYA-RODRIGUEZ, also known as Paulo Montoya-
Rodriguez,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 7:14-CR-720-1


Before DAVIS, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Paulo Osiel
Montoya-Rodriguez 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).             Montoya-Rodriguez has filed a
response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the



       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 14-41073    Document: 00513080055    Page: 2   Date Filed: 06/16/2015


                                No. 14-41073

record reflected therein, as well as Montoya-Rodriguez’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, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the
APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.




                                      2
