     Case: 11-51137     Document: 00511963823         Page: 1     Date Filed: 08/21/2012




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

                                                                            FILED
                                                                          August 21, 2012
                                     No. 11-51137
                                  Conference Calendar                      Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                  Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MARCELO CONTRERAS-BEJARANO,

                                                  Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeals from the United States District Court
                         for the Western District of Texas
                              USDC No. 4:11-CR-28-1


Before SMITH, ELROD, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
        The attorney appointed to represent Marcelo Contreras-Bejarano 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). Contreras-Bejarano 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 issue
for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is

       *
         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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 11-51137   Document: 00511963823   Page: 2   Date Filed: 08/21/2012

                              No. 11-51137

GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the
APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.




                                    2
