The attorney appointed to represent James Kenneth Hudnall has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Hudnall has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. Counsel’s brief satisfies the standards set forth in United States v. Flores, 632 *356 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011), regarding Hudnall’s sentencing but fails regarding the district court’s compliance with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11. Nevertheless, we concur with counsel’s ultimate assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous 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. As counsel’s brief was filed only shortly after Flores was issued, he may not have had sufficient time to become aware of those standards. Counsel should make certain that any future Anders brief he files fully conforms with Flores.