Case: 14-41151      Document: 00513080131         Page: 1    Date Filed: 06/16/2015




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


                                    No. 14-41151                                 FILED
                                 Conference Calendar
                                                                             June 16, 2015
                                                                            Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                 Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

LENIN MAURICIO AMADOR-AMADOR, also known as Carlos Lenin,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 1:14-CR-507-1


Before DAVIS, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Lenin Mauricio
Amador-Amador 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).            Amador-Amador 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


       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 14-41151   Document: 00513080131    Page: 2   Date Filed: 06/16/2015


                               No. 14-41151

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