     Case: 13-40935      Document: 00512564291         Page: 1    Date Filed: 03/18/2014




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

                                    No. 13-40935                               FILED
                                  Summary Calendar                       March 18, 2014
                                                                          Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                               Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

NOE ALMEIDA-OLAGUE,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 7:13-CR-705-1


Before KING, DAVIS, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Noe Almeida-
Olague 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). Almeida-Olague 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


       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 13-40935    Document: 00512564291     Page: 2   Date Filed: 03/18/2014


                                 No. 13-40935

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
