The attorney appointed to represent Kirk Jenkins 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). Jenkins has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. Though counsel does not specifically address the validity of the ap *337 peal waiver in Jenkins’s plea agreement, there is no indication in the record that Jenkins’s ratification of the plea agreement was anything but knowing and voluntary. As such, we concur with counsel’s 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 in part as frivolous, see 5th Cir. R. 42.2, and in part as moot based on Jenkins’s completion of his term of imprisonment, see United States v. Heredia-Holguin, 823 F.3d 337, 340-42 (5th Cir. 2016).