
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ronald MEJIA-HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 15-50611
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Date Filed: 08/25/2016
    Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, Mara Asya Blatt, Esq., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Kristin L. Davidson, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Maureen Scott Franco, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant
    Before SMITH, WIENER, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

The issue on appeal is whether 18 U.S.C. § 16(b) is unconstitutionally vague under Johnson v. United States, — U.S. -, 135 S.Ct. 2551, 192 L.Ed.2d 569 (2015). This matter was put on hold awaiting a decision in No. 15-40041. That appeal has now been decided. See United States v. Gonzalez-Longoria, 831 F.3d 670 (5th Cir. 2016) (en banc) (holding against vagueness).

The parties have filed, at the court’s request, letter briefs addressing the proper disposition. The appellant’s attorney, the Federal Public Defender, advises that the case is moot, irrespective of the opinion in Gonzalez-Longoria, because the appellant has completed his term of imprisonment, has been released from federal custody, and presumably has been deported, and he did not challenge the unexpired period of supervised release. See United States v. Heredia-Holguin, 823 F.3d 337, 343 n.3 (5th Cir. 2016) (en banc). The government urges affirmance or, in the alternative, dismissal for mootness.

The appeal is DISMISSED as moot. 
      
      
         Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
     