Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Sabino MOLINA-MORALES, also known as Gabino Molina-Morales, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-11-30
Citations: 623 F. App'x 254
Docket Number: No. 15-40683
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Sabino MOLINA-MORALES, also known as Gabino Molina-Morales, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before WIENER, HIGGINSON, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 623
Pages: 254–254

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Sabino MOLINA-MORALES, also known as Gabino Molina-Morales, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-40683
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Nov. 30, 2015.
Renata Ann Gowie, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, H. Michael Sokolow, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Houston,- TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before WIENER, HIGGINSON, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Sabino Molina-Morales 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). Molina-Morales has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel's brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Molina-Morales'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. Molina-Morales's motion for the appointment of new counsel is DENIED. See United States v. Wagner, 158 F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir.1998).
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.