Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Hector Hugo BADILLO-AMAYA, also known as Jesse Gutierrez Cantu, also known as Hector Hugo Badillo, also known as Hector Hugo Badillar-Amaya, also known as Hector Hugo Badillo Amaya, also known as Hector Hugo Badilla, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-10-18
Citations: 669 F. App'x 746
Docket Number: No. 16-20066 Conference Calendar
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Hector Hugo BADILLO-AMAYA, also known as Jesse Gutierrez Cantu, also known as Hector Hugo Badillo, also known as Hector Hugo Badillar-Amaya, also known as Hector Hugo Badillo Amaya, also known as Hector Hugo Badilla, Defendant-Appellant
Judges: Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 669
Pages: 746–747

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Hector Hugo BADILLO-AMAYA, also known as Jesse Gutierrez Cantu, also known as Hector Hugo Badillo, also known as Hector Hugo Badillar-Amaya, also known as Hector Hugo Badillo Amaya, also known as Hector Hugo Badilla, Defendant-Appellant
No. 16-20066 Conference Calendar
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Date Filed: 10/18/2016
Renata Ann Gowie, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee
Hector Hugo Badillo-Amaya, Cl Adams County Correctional Institution, Washington, MS, for Defendant-Appellant
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.