Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Cristian GIRON-RAMIREZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-06-16
Citations: 607 F. App'x 382
Docket Number: No. 14-40813
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Cristian GIRON-RAMIREZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before DAVIS, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 607
Pages: 382–383

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Cristian GIRON-RAMIREZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-40813
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
June 16, 2015.
Renata Ann Gowie, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Philip G. Gallagher, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Laura Fletcher Leavitt, Assistant Federal Public Defend er, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Cristian Giron-Ramirez, Adelanto, CA, pro se.
Before DAVIS, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Cristian Giron-Ramirez 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). Gir-on-Ramirez has filed a motion for appointment of counsel on appeal but has not filed a response to the Anders motion. We have reviewed counsel's brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Giron-Ramirez's motion. We concur with counsel's assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, Giron-Ra-mirez's motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED, 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Pursuant to 5th Cir R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.