Case: 16-11366      Document: 00514121377         Page: 1    Date Filed: 08/18/2017




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

                                    No. 16-11366                              FILED
                                 Conference Calendar                    August 18, 2017
                                                                         Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                              Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

FRANCISCO MANUEL RADAMEZ-NAVA, also known as Ghost, true name
Jose Antonio Salinas,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Northern District of Texas
                            USDC No. 3:14-CR-367-77


Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Francisco Manuel Radamez-Nava
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).       Radamez-Nava has not filed a response.                     We have
reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected



       * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 16-11366    Document: 00514121377     Page: 2   Date Filed: 08/18/2017


                                 No. 16-11366

therein. 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