The attorney appointed to represent Everly James 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). James has not filed a response. During the pendency of this appeal, James completed the term of imprisonment imposed upon revocation of his supervised release and was released from custody. As Jamess revocation sentence did not include an additional term of supervised release, there is no case or controversy for us to address. See Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7, 118 S.Ct. 978, 140 L.Ed.2d 43 (1998); see also United States v. Clark, 193 F.3d 845, 847-48 (5th Cir. 1999).
The appeal is therefore DISMISSED as moot, and counsels 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FN* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.