     Case: 17-11295      Document: 00514531730         Page: 1    Date Filed: 06/27/2018




           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                                                                       United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                Fifth Circuit
                                    No. 17-11295                              FILED
                                  Summary Calendar                        June 27, 2018
                                                                         Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                              Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JORGE ANDRES NUNEZ-SAENZ, also known as Tucan,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Northern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 5:17-CR-38-1


Before WIENER, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jorge Andres
Nunez-Saenz 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). Nunez-Saenz has filed a response. We
have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected
therein, as well as Nunez-Saenz’s response.                We concur with counsel’s


       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 17-11295      Document: 00514531730   Page: 2   Date Filed: 06/27/2018


                                 No. 17-11295

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
