Court Opinion

ID: 3189512
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-03-29 18:00:48.383139+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:24:56.411456
License: Public Domain

Case: 15-10624      Document: 00513442577         Page: 1    Date Filed: 03/29/2016

           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                                                                          United States Court of Appeals

                                    No. 15-10624
                                                                                   Fifth Circuit

                                                                                 FILED
                                  Summary Calendar                         March 29, 2016
                                                                            Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                 Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff–Appellee,

versus

LENIN MENDOZA,

                                                 Defendant–Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Northern District of Texas
                              USDC No. 4:15-CR-41

Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *

       The attorney appointed to represent Lenin Mendoza has moved for leave

       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
    Case: 15-10624    Document: 00513442577    Page: 2   Date Filed: 03/29/2016

                                No. 15-10624

to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011).
Mendoza has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the
relevant portions of the record. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the
appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, the
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.

                                      2