     Case: 18-60798      Document: 00515123051         Page: 1    Date Filed: 09/18/2019




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

                                    No. 18-60798                                FILED
                                 Conference Calendar                    September 18, 2019
                                                                           Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JASON COOPER, also known as Joshua O’Neil Cooper,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                  Appeals from the United States District Court
                     for the Southern District of Mississippi
                             USDC No. 1:18-CR-56-1


Before CLEMENT, GRAVES, and OLDHAM, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Jason Cooper 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).
Cooper’s pro se motion for the appointment of new counsel is DENIED; his pro
se response, which we construe as including a motion to consider his response
despite its untimeliness, is GRANTED. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and


       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 18-60798    Document: 00515123051     Page: 2   Date Filed: 09/18/2019


                                 No. 18-60798

the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Cooper’s
response. We 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
