UNITED STATES v. MCCALLISTER (2019)

The attorney appointed to represent Matthew McCallister 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). McCallister has not filed a response.

During the pendency of this appeal, McCallister completed the sentence imposed upon revocation of his supervised release and is no longer in custody. The district court did not impose an additional term of supervised release. Accordingly, there is no case or controversy for this court to address. See Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7, 118 S.Ct. 978, 140 L.Ed.2d 43 (1998); United States v. Lares-Meraz, 452 F.3d 352, 354-55 (5th Cir. 2006).

The appeal is therefore DISMISSED AS MOOT, and counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is DENIED as unnecessary.

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.  

PER CURIAM: * FN* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.