UNITED STATES v. PENA MARTINEZ (2021)

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Eric Eliel Pena-Martinez 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). Pena-Martinez has not filed a response.

During the pendency of this appeal, Pena-Martinez completed the sentence imposed on revocation of supervised release and was released from custody. Because Pena-Martinez has not shown that he will suffer collateral consequences as a result of the revocation of his supervised release and because no additional term of supervised release was imposed, the instant appeal does not present a case or controversy, and this court lacks jurisdiction. See Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7, 118 S.Ct. 978, 140 L.Ed.2d 43 (1998); United States v. Clark, 193 F.3d 845, 847-48 (5th Cir. 1999).

Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED AS MOOT, and counsel's motion for leave to withdraw is DENIED as unnecessary.

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.  

Per Curiam:* FN* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.