Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jaime Arrellano LOPEZ, also known as Jaime Arrellano-Lopez, also known as Mario Jaime Orellana, also known as Mario Lopez, also known as Mario Jaime Arrallano Lopez, also known as Mario J. Orellano, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-06-18
Citations: 528 F. App'x 397
Docket Number: No. 12-20601
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jaime Arrellano LOPEZ, also known as Jaime Arrellano-Lopez, also known as Mario Jaime Orellana, also known as Mario Lopez, also known as Mario Jaime Arrallano Lopez, also known as Mario J. Orellano, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before JONES, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 528
Pages: 397–398

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jaime Arrellano LOPEZ, also known as Jaime Arrellano-Lopez, also known as Mario Jaime Orellana, also known as Mario Lopez, also known as Mario Jaime Arrallano Lopez, also known as Mario J. Orellano, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 12-20601
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
June 18, 2013.
Renata Ann Gowie, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Jaime Arrellano Lopez, Beaumont, TX, pro se.
Before JONES, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jaime Arrellano Lopez 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). Arrel- laño Lopez has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel's brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. 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.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir R. 47.5.4.