     Case: 17-40240      Document: 00514313767         Page: 1    Date Filed: 01/19/2018




           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                                                                         United States Court of Appeals

                                    No. 17-40240
                                                                                  Fifth Circuit

                                                                                FILED
                                  Summary Calendar                       January 19, 2018
                                                                           Lyle W. Cayce
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                                                       Clerk


                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ADAN PRADO ALVAREZ, also known as Cocho, also known as Jorge
Vasquez Estrada, also known as Cenaido,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Eastern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 4:11-CR-6-34


Before WIENER, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Adan Prado Alvarez (Prado Alvarez)
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). Prado Alvarez has not filed a response. We have reviewed
counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We



       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 17-40240    Document: 00514313767    Page: 2   Date Filed: 01/19/2018


                                No. 17-40240

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
