     Case: 16-20802      Document: 00514519616         Page: 1    Date Filed: 06/20/2018




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

                                    No. 16-20802                            FILED
                                 Conference Calendar                    June 20, 2018
                                                                       Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                            Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MARQUES TALIAFERRO MARTIN,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 4:16-CR-116-1


Before SOUTHWICK, WILLETT, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Marques Taliaferro Martin has
moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief and a supplemental brief in
accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States
v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Martin has not filed a response.
Although Martin remains subject to a term of supervised release, he has
completed the term of imprisonment. We have reviewed counsel’s briefs and


       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 16-20802     Document: 00514519616     Page: 2   Date Filed: 06/20/2018


                                  No. 16-20802

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 GRANTED, counsel is
excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED
in part as frivolous, see 5TH CIR. R. 42.2, and in part as moot, see United States
v. Heredia-Holguin, 823 F.3d 337, 340 (5th Cir. 2016) (en banc).




                                        2
