     Case: 17-50800      Document: 00514530132         Page: 1    Date Filed: 06/26/2018




           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                                                                       United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                Fifth Circuit
                                    No. 17-50800                              FILED
                                  Summary Calendar                        June 26, 2018
                                                                         Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                              Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JAVIER SOTO, also known as Buddha,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Western District of Texas
                            USDC No. 3:09-CR-1380-6


Before DAVIS, CLEMENT, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Javier Soto 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). Soto 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 17-50800      Document: 00514530132   Page: 2   Date Filed: 06/26/2018


                                 No. 17-50800

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
