Case: 12-40813       Document: 00512319590           Page: 1    Date Filed: 07/24/2013




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

                                                                              FILED
                                                                             July 24, 2013
                                     No. 12-40813
                                   Summary Calendar                          Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                  Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                   Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

IGNACIO ESTEBAN CONTRERAS-MEZA, also known as Tito Contreras-
Meza, also known as Tito Romero, also known as Ignacio Tito Contreras-Meza,

                                                   Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 5:12-CR-110-1


Before DAVIS, SOUTHWICK and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Ignacio Esteban
Contreras-Meza has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in
accordance with Anders v. California, 

 (1967), and United States
v. Flores, 

 (5th Cir. 2011). Contreras-Meza has filed a response.
We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record


       *
         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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be
published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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: 12-40813    Document: 00512319590    Page: 2   Date Filed: 07/24/2013

                                No. 12-40813

reflected therein, as well as Contreras-Meza’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.




                                      2