Case: 14-31232      Document: 00513363245         Page: 1    Date Filed: 02/01/2016




           IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                                                                          United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                   Fifth Circuit
                                    No. 14-31232                                 FILED
                                  Summary Calendar                        February 1, 2016
                                                                            Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                 Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

CHRISTOPHER JOSEPH,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                  Appeals from the United States District Court
                      for the Eastern District of Louisiana
                             USDC No. 2:13-CR-184


Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Christopher Joseph has moved for
leave to withdraw and has filed briefs in accordance with Anders v. California,

(1967), and United States v. Flores, 

(5th Cir. 2011).
Joseph has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s briefs 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.


       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 14-31232      Document: 00513363245   Page: 2   Date Filed: 02/01/2016


                                 No. 14-31232

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