
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Pablo Edmundo HERRERA-ESPINOSA, also known as Pablo Edmundo Herrera, also known as Herrera Espinoza Pablo Edmundo, also known as Pablo Herrera, also known as Pablo E. Herrera, also known as Pablo Edmundo Herrera-Espinoza, also known as Pablo Edmundo Herrera Espinoza, also known as Luis Gomez, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 13-20535
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Oct. 27, 2015.
    Renata Ann Gowie, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Donna Marie Hoffmann, Esq., Dallas, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Pablo Edmundo Herrera-Espinosa, Raymondville, TX, pro se.
    Before WIENER, HIGGINSON, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
   STEPHEN A. HIGGINSON, Circuit Judge:

The attorney appointed to represent Pablo Edmundo Herrera-Espinosa. (“Herrera-Espinosa”) has moved for leave to withdraw and has-filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir.2011). Herrera-Espinosa filed a timely response.

Herrera-Espinosa pled guilty to illegally re-entering the United States following deportation after a felony conviction. On September 6, 2013, the district court sentenced him to thirty (30) months imprisonment followed by three (3) years of supervised release. Herrera-Espinosa was removed from the United States on June 30, 2015. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Herrera-Es-pinosa’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Because Herrera-Espinosa has completed the confinement portion of his sentence, any argument that the prison term should be reduced is moot. See United States v. Rosenbaum-Alanis, 483 F.3d 381, 382 (5th Cir.2007).

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the. APPEAL IS DISMISSED in part as frivolous, see 5th Cir. R. 42.2, and in part as moot. See Rosenbaum-Alanis, 483 F.3d at 382-83. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
     