Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. James BALDEMORO, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-03-22
Citations: 644 F. App'x 286
Docket Number: No. 15-20300
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. James BALDEMORO, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before DAVIS, JONES, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 644
Pages: 286–287

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. James BALDEMORO, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-20300
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
March 22, 2016.
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 DAVIS, JONES, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent James Baldemoro 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). Baldemoro has not filed a response.
We have reviewed counsel's brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. While counsel addresses the validity of Baldemoro's appeal waiver, counsel does not discuss the district court's compliance with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11. An appeal waiver in the plea agreement does not waive the district court's compliance with Rule 11 or the need to brief this issue adequately in an Anders brief. See United States v. Carreon-Ibarra, 673 F.3d 358, 362 n. 3 (5th Cir.2012); see also United States v. Brown, 328 F.3d 787, 789-90 (5th Cir.2003). Nevertheless, our independent review confirms that the guilty plea was knowing and voluntary. We thus 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.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R, 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.