Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Nathaniel Edward GONZALEZ, also known as Nathan, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-08-29
Citations: 580 F. App'x 267
Docket Number: No. 13-11036
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Nathaniel Edward GONZALEZ, also known as Nathan, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 580
Pages: 267–267

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Nathaniel Edward GONZALEZ, also known as Nathan, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 13-11036
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Aug. 29, 2014.
James Wesley Hendrix, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Jason Douglas Hawkins, Federal Public Defender, Sam L. Ogan, Esq., Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Dallas, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before CLEMENT, PRADO, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Nathaniel Edward Gonzalez in his appeal of his revocation of supervised release and resulting nine-month sentence 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). Gonzalez has not filed a response.
During the pendency of this appeal, Gonzalez completed the 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); Bailey v. Southerland, 821 F.2d 277, 278 (5th Cir. 1987). 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.