Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Domingo LOPEZ, also known as Domingo Suarez Lopez, also known as Domingo Suarez, also known as Jaime Suarez, also known as Domingo Torres, also known as Jaime Torres, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-12-14
Citations: 671 F. App'x 320
Docket Number: No. 16-20094 Summary Calendar
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Domingo LOPEZ, also known as Domingo Suarez Lopez, also known as Domingo Suarez, also known as Jaime Suarez, also known as Domingo Torres, also known as Jaime Torres, Defendant-Appellant
Judges: Before REAVLEY, OWEN, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 671
Pages: 320–321

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Domingo LOPEZ, also known as Domingo Suarez Lopez, also known as Domingo Suarez, also known as Jaime Suarez, also known as Domingo Torres, also known as Jaime Torres, Defendant-Appellant
No. 16-20094 Summary Calendar
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Date Filed: 12/14/2016
Renata Ann Gowie, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee
Domingo Lopez, Pro Se
Before REAVLEY, OWEN, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Domingo 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). 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 Cíe. 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.