Case: 19-10025      Document: 00515176867         Page: 1    Date Filed: 10/28/2019




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

                                    No. 19-10025                                FILED
                                 Conference Calendar                     October 28, 2019
                                                                           Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

CARLOS GARCIA-DIAZ, also known as Carlos Diaz Garcia,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Northern District of Texas
                             USDC No. 3:17-CR-513-1


Before CLEMENT, GRAVES, and OLDHAM, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The attorney appointed to represent Carlos Garcia-Diaz 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).
Garcia-Diaz 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 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 19-10025      Document: 00515176867   Page: 2   Date Filed: 10/28/2019


                                 No. 19-10025

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