Court Opinion

ID: 8681187
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-25 05:13:35.825684+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:57:30.481220
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM: *
The attorney retained to represent Juan Alberto Quelis 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). Quelis has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Quelis’s response. 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. Counsel’s motion to withdraw based on a purported conflict and appoint new counsel or allow the defendant to represent his own interest is DENIED as moot.

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.