Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Baldemar SANTANA-CORONADO, also known as Baldemar Santana, also known as Baldemar Coronado-Santana, also known as Baldemar Coronado Santana, also known as Baldemar Coronado, also known as Jose Cruz-Rubalcava, also known as Jose Cruz Rubalcava, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2018-02-20
Citations: 713 F. App'x 303
Docket Number: No. 17-50150 Conference Calendar
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Baldemar SANTANA-CORONADO, also known as Baldemar Santana, also known as Baldemar Coronado-Santana, also known as Baldemar Coronado Santana, also known as Baldemar Coronado, also known as Jose Cruz-Rubalcava, also known as Jose Cruz Rubalcava, Defendant-Appellant
Judges: Before REAVLEY, CLEMENT, and HO, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 713
Pages: 303–303

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Baldemar SANTANA-CORONADO, also known as Baldemar Santana, also known as Baldemar Coronado-Santana, also known as Baldemar Coronado Santana, also known as Baldemar Coronado, also known as Jose Cruz-Rubalcava, also known as Jose Cruz Rubalcava, Defendant-Appellant
No. 17-50150 Conference Calendar
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Filed February 20, 2018
Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee
Baldemar Santana-Coronado, Pro Se
Before REAVLEY, CLEMENT, and HO, Circuit Judges.

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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.