     Case: 16-41688      Document: 00514207233         Page: 1    Date Filed: 10/24/2017




           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT


                                    No. 16-41688
                                 Conference Calendar
                                                                         United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                  Fifth Circuit

                                                                                FILED
                                                                         October 24, 2017
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                                                                           Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk
                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

FERNANDO ARTURO FLORES-FANG, also known as Arturo, also known
as Primo,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 5:12-CR-223-3


Before KING, OWEN, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Fernando Arturo Flores-Fang 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). Flores-Fang has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s
brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with



       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 16-41688    Document: 00514207233    Page: 2   Date Filed: 10/24/2017


                                No. 16-41688

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
