Case: 16-11325 Document: 00513928778 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/28/2017
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
No. 16-11325 FILED
Summary Calendar March 28, 2017
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
RUDY GARCIA,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 5:16-CR-11-1
Before JOLLY, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Rudy Garcia has
moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th
Cir. 2011). Garcia has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed
to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Garcia’s claim of ineffective assistance
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH
CIR. R. 47.5.4.
Case: 16-11325 Document: 00513928778 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/28/2017
No. 16-11325
of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claim without prejudice to
collateral review. See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014).
We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record
reflected therein, as well as Garcia’s response. We concur with counsel’s
assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review
and dispense with further briefing. However, the district court’s written
judgment fails to reflect the dismissal of counts two, three, and four of the
indictment. These counts were dismissed by the district court on the
Government’s motion. Additionally, the written judgment incorrectly states
that the offense of conviction involved “amphetamine” when in fact the offense
involved “methamphetamine.” A remand to correct such clerical errors is
proper. See FED. R. CRIM. P. 36.
Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED,
Garcia’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED, and the case is REMANDED
to the district court with the instructions to correct the judgment to reflect the
dismissal of counts two, three, and four of the indictment and to replace
“amphetamine” with “methamphetamine.” Garcia’s motion for appointment of
counsel is DENIED.
2