
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose ESTRADA-CARRIZALES, Defendant-Appellant
    No. 16-40253 Summary Calendar
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Date Filed: 12/12/2016
    
      Renata Ann Gowie, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Jose Estrada-Carrizales, Pro Se
    Before HIGGINBOTHAM, PRADO, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose Estrada-Carrizales 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). Estrada-Carrizales 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 nonfrivo-lous 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. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
     
      
      . We conclude that the Court's decision in Mathis v. United States, — U.S. —, 136 S.Ct. 2243, 195 L.Ed.2d 604 (2016), issued after the FPD filed its brief, does not necessitate further briefing regarding the analysis of Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 644(D)(1).
     