Case ID: f-appx_364/html/0108-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Buokai Sonsing PEELER, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 09-40124
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Feb. 3, 2010.
    Robert L. Rawls, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Beaumont, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Bryan Sperry Laine, Bryan Laine PC, Kountze, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before KING, STEWART, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

The attorney appointed to represent Buokai Sonsing Peeler 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). Peeler has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal.

The record does reveal a clerical error in the judgment. The judgment reflects that Peeler was assessed a $200 fíne. However, the district court actually ordered Peeler to pay $200 in restitution.

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. This matter is REMANDED for correction of the clerical error pursuant to Fed.R. CrimP. 36. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Ciu. R. 47.5.4.