Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Mauricio ESPINOZA-JIMENEZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-09-11
Citations: 697 F. App'x 356
Docket Number: No. 16-51448 Summary Calendar
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Mauricio ESPINOZA-JIMENEZ, Defendant-Appellant
Judges: Before DAVIS, PRADO, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 697
Pages: 356–357

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Mauricio ESPINOZA-JIMENEZ, Defendant-Appellant
No. 16-51448 Summary Calendar
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
FILED September 11, 2017
Joseph H. Gay, Jr., U.S. Attorney’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appel-lee.
Mauricio Espinoza-Jimenez, Cl Dalby, Post, TX, pro se.
Judy Fulmer Madewell, Maureen Scott Franco, Federal Public Defender’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before DAVIS, PRADO, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Mauricio Espinoza-Jimenez 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). Espinoza-Jimenez 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. See United States v. Pesina-Rodriguez, 825 F.3d 787, 788 (5th Cir. 2016). 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 Espinoza-Jimenez's completion of his term of imprisonment, see United States v. Heredia-Holguin, 823 F.3d 337, 340-42 (5th Cir. 2016).
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th CIR.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.