Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Florencio PAISANO-MARTINEZ, also known as Lorenzo Pizano, also known as Florencio Martinez, also known as Florencio Paisano Martinez, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-07-22
Citations: 433 F. App'x 318
Docket Number: No. 10-20649
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Florencio PAISANO-MARTINEZ, also known as Lorenzo Pizano, also known as Florencio Martinez, also known as Florencio Paisano Martinez, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before REAVLEY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 433
Pages: 318–319

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Florencio PAISANO-MARTINEZ, also known as Lorenzo Pizano, also known as Florencio Martinez, also known as Florencio Paisano Martinez, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 10-20649
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
July 22, 2011.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Timothy William Crooks, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Sarah Beth Landau, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before REAVLEY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Florencio Paisano-Martinez 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). Paisano-Martinez 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 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.