UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-4246
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
MARDENA THOMAS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge.
(CR-98-356)
Submitted: June 16, 2003 Decided: June 25, 2003
Before TRAXLER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David K. Haller, RICHTER & HALLER, L.L.C., Mount Pleasant, South
Carolina, for Appellant. J. Strom Thurmond, Jr., United States
Attorney, Beth Drake, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia,
South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
In 1999, Mardena Thomas was convicted and sentenced for
conspiracy to commit money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 1956(h) (2000). In January 2003, the district court entered an
amended judgment for correction of sentence pursuant to Fed. R.
Crim. P. 36 to include an omitted reference to an order of
forfeiture. Thomas now appeals the amended criminal judgment,
claiming that the district court exceeded the scope of Rule 36 in
amending the judgment.
Rule 36 provides that “[a]fter giving any notice it considers
appropriate, the court may at any time correct a clerical error in
a judgment, order, or other part of the record, or correct an error
in the record arising from oversight or omission.” We have
reviewed the transcript of the sentencing hearing and the order of
forfeiture that was executed by the district court at the hearing,
and find that the court properly amended the judgment to accurately
reflect its intention at sentencing to include the forfeiture in
the judgment.
Accordingly, we affirm the amended criminal judgment. We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions
are adequately presented in the materials before the court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2