Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Eric Rashad JONES, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-06-16
Citations: 604 F. App'x 368
Docket Number: No. 14-10769
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Eric Rashad JONES, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before DAVIS, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 604
Pages: 368–369

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Eric Rashad JONES, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-10769
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
June 16, 2015.
James Wesley Hendrix, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
James Matthew Wright, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Jerry Van Beard, Esq., Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office Dallas, TX, Christopher Allen Curtis, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Fort Worth, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before DAVIS, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Eric Rashad Jones 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). Jones has not filed a response.
During the pendency of this appeal, Jones completed the six-month sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release and was released from custody. Because no additional term of supervised release was imposed, the instant appeal is moot. See Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7, 118 S.Ct. 978, 140 L.Ed.2d 43 (1998); United States v. Clark, 193 F.3d 845, 847-48 (5th Cir.1999). Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED as moot, and counsel's motion for leave to withdraw is DENIED as unnecessary.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.