Case: 19-40389      Document: 00515224516         Page: 1    Date Filed: 12/05/2019




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

                                                                              FILED
                                                                         December 5, 2019
                                    No. 19-40389                           Lyle W. Cayce
                                 Conference Calendar                            Clerk


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JAIME ALEJANDRO CORPUS-GONZALEZ,

                                                 Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Southern District of Texas
                            USDC No. 7:18-CR-1837-1


Before CLEMENT, GRAVES, and OLDHAM, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
       The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jaime Alejandro
Corpus-Gonzalez 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).            Corpus-Gonzalez 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 19-40389   Document: 00515224516    Page: 2   Date Filed: 12/05/2019


                               No. 19-40389

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