Case: 13-11292      Document: 00512746106         Page: 1    Date Filed: 08/26/2014




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


                                    No. 13-11292                                FILED
                                  Summary Calendar                        August 26, 2014
                                                                           Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff–Appellee,

v.

ALVIN TUCKER,

                                                 Defendant–Appellant.


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Northern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 1:13-CR-57-1


Before PRADO, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Alvin Tucker 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). Tucker 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 presents no nonfrivolous issue for


       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 13-11292    Document: 00512746106    Page: 2   Date Filed: 08/26/2014


                                No. 13-11292

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