Case ID: f-appx_589/html/0487-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Israel PINEDA, a.k.a. Becerro, a.k.a. Borrego, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 14-10419
    Non-Argument Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
    Dec. 24, 2014.
    Lisa Wilson Tarvin, Dahil Dueño Goss, Lawrence R. Sommerfeld, Sally Yates, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Israel Pineda, Loretto, PA, pro se.
    
      Before JORDAN, JILL PRYOR and BLACK, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Mary Erickson, appointed counsel for Israel Pineda in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Pineda’s convictions and sentences are AFFIRMED. However, we sua sponte REMAND for the limited purpose of correcting a scrivener’s error in Count 2 of the written judgment. The statute of conviction should read 18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(2)(A), (h), rather than solely 18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(2)(A).