     Case: 15-20732      Document: 00513725479         Page: 1    Date Filed: 10/19/2016




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

                                    No. 15-20732                              FILED
                                  Summary Calendar                     October 19, 2016
                                                                         Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                              Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

RIGOBERTO GONZALEZ-LUNA, also known as Riboberto Luns Gonzalez,
also known as Leonardo LNU, also known as Rigoberto Gonzalez-Luna, also
known as Rigoberto Tomas Gonzalez,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 4:15-CR-388-1


Before JONES, WIENER, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Rigoberto Gonzalez Luna 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).    Gonzalez Luna 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 15-20732    Document: 00513725479    Page: 2   Date Filed: 10/19/2016


                                No. 15-20732

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
