     Case: 16-51244      Document: 00514069589         Page: 1    Date Filed: 07/12/2017




           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                                                                          United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                   Fifth Circuit
                                    No. 16-51244                                 FILED
                                  Summary Calendar                           July 12, 2017
                                                                            Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                 Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

HECTOR MEZA-PEREZ,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Western District of Texas
                             USDC No. 3:16-CR-947-1


Before JOLLY, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Hector Meza-Perez
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). Meza-Perez 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 16-51244    Document: 00514069589     Page: 2   Date Filed: 07/12/2017


                                 No. 16-51244

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 based on Meza-Perez’s completion of his sentence. See Spencer v.
Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7 (1998); United States v. Heredia-Holguin, 823 F.3d 337,
340 (5th Cir. 2016) (en banc).




                                      2
