     Case: 11-50610     Document: 00511904213         Page: 1     Date Filed: 06/28/2012




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

                                                                            FILED
                                                                           June 28, 2012
                                     No. 11-50610
                                   Summary Calendar                        Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                  Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

RENEE CALLIDA HAMILTON,

                                                  Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Western District of Texas
                             USDC No. 3:11-CR-467-2


Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS and ELROD, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
        The attorney appointed to represent Renee Callida Hamilton 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). Hamilton has filed a response in which she moves to dismiss her
appeal without prejudice. Because Hamilton is not entitled to a dismissal
without prejudice, see 5TH CIR. RULE 42.4, we have reviewed counsel’s brief and
the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 11-50610    Document: 00511904213    Page: 2   Date Filed: 06/28/2012

                                No. 11-50610

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.    Hamilton’s motion to dismiss without prejudice is
DENIED.




                                      2
