     Case: 11-40393     Document: 00511709631         Page: 1     Date Filed: 12/29/2011




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

                                                                            FILED
                                                                        December 29, 2011
                                     No. 11-40393
                                   Summary Calendar                        Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                  Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MARIO JEHOBANNY GARAY-GARAY, also known as Santos Tomas Aguilar,
also known as Jose De La Cruz-Lopez,

                                                  Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 2:10-CR-977-1


Before GARZA, SOUTHWICK, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
        The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Mario Jehobanny
Garay-Garay 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). Garay-Garay has not filed a response. We have
reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein.
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 11-40393    Document: 00511709631    Page: 2   Date Filed: 12/29/2011

                                No. 11-40393

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
