     Case: 16-41457      Document: 00514123982         Page: 1    Date Filed: 08/21/2017




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

                                    No. 16-41457                              FILED
                                 Conference Calendar                    August 21, 2017
                                                                         Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                              Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MARIO BARAJAS,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 1:16-CR-236-1


Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Mario Barajas 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).
Barajas has filed a response.          We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the
relevant parts of the record reflected therein, as well as Barajas’s response.
We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous


       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 16-41457   Document: 00514123982    Page: 2   Date Filed: 08/21/2017


                               No. 16-41457

issue for appellate review.   Accordingly, Barajas’s motions to vacate his
sentence and remand the case to the district court, incorporated in his
response, are DENIED; 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
