Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Raymundo BALLEZA-ZAPATA, also known as Raymundo Balleza, also known as Raymundo Zapata Balleza, also known as Raymundo Balleza Zapata, also known as Reymundo Zapata Balleza, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-06-13
Citations: 522 F. App'x 224
Docket Number: No. 12-20575
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Raymundo BALLEZA-ZAPATA, also known as Raymundo Balleza, also known as Raymundo Zapata Balleza, also known as Raymundo Balleza Zapata, also known as Reymundo Zapata Balleza, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before HIGGINBOTHAM, OWEN, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 522
Pages: 224–225

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Raymundo BALLEZA-ZAPATA, also known as Raymundo Balleza, also known as Raymundo Zapata Balleza, also known as Raymundo Balleza Zapata, also known as Reymundo Zapata Balleza, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 12-20575
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
June 13, 2013.
Renata Ann Gowie, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Sarah Beth Landau, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Molly Estelle Odom, Esq., Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, OWEN, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Raymundo Balleza-Zapata has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir.2011). Balle-za-Zapata has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel's brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Balleza-Zapata's response. 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.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.