Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-14-10665/USCOURTS-ca5-14-10665-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
John Rashon Hyder
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-10665

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JOHN RASHON HYDER,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:12-CR-330

Before PRADO, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent John Rashon Hyder

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). Hyder has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s 

brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as 

Hyder’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal 

 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

July 7, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 14-10665 Document: 00513106983 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/07/2015
No. 14-10665

2

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. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

The record, however, reflects a clerical error in the written judgment. 

The written judgment reflects a conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(iii). 

In fact, Hyder pleaded guilty to violating and was sentenced under 

§ 924(c)(1)(A)(i). Accordingly, we REMAND for correction of the clerical error 

in the written judgment in accordance with Federal Rule of Criminal 

Procedure 36. See United States v. Higgins, 739 F.3d 733, 739 n.16 (5th Cir.), 

cert. denied, 134 S. Ct. 2319 (2014); United States v. Rosales, 448 F. App’x 466, 

466-67 (5th Cir. 2011).

Case: 14-10665 Document: 00513106983 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/07/2015