     Case: 12-20696       Document: 00512347330         Page: 1     Date Filed: 08/20/2013




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

                                                                            FILED
                                                                          August 20, 2013
                                     No. 12-20696
                                  Conference Calendar                      Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                  Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

DANIS HUMBERTO VELASQUEZ-MONTOYA, also known as Danis Humberto
Velasquez, also known as Danis Humberto Valesquez-Montoya, also known as
Danis Humberto Velasquez Montoya, also known as Daniz Humberto Velasquez,

                                                  Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 4:12-CR-204-1


Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Danis Humberto
Velasquez-Montoya 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).             Velasquez-Montoya has not filed a
response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the


       *
         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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 12-20696   Document: 00512347330     Page: 2   Date Filed: 08/20/2013

                                No. 12-20696

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




                                     2
