Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. John MENEWEATHER, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-07-09
Citations: 472 F. App'x 324
Docket Number: No. 11-31074
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. John MENEWEATHER, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 472
Pages: 324–325

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. John MENEWEATHER, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 11-31074
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
July 9, 2012.
Cristina Walker, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Shreveport, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Rebecca Louise Hudsmith, Esq., Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Western District Of Louisiana, Lafayette, LA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before CLEMENT, SOUTHWICK, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent John Meneweather has moved for leave to withdraw in Meneweather's appeal of the district court's order denying his motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) 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). Meneweather has filed a response.
We have reviewed counsel's brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Meneweather's response. We concur with counsel's assessment that the instant 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.
We note that in Meneweather's response he seeks relief from the dismissal of his direct criminal appeal (Case No. 09-30294) for failure to prosecute. The instant appeal from the denial of his § 3582(c)(2) motion, however, is not the proper forum for granting such relief.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under dle limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.