Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Ryan Scott Daniel TAYLOR, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-01-19
Citations: 676 F. App'x 256
Docket Number: No. 16-40421
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Ryan Scott Daniel TAYLOR, Defendant-Appellant
Judges: Before DAVIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 676
Pages: 256–257

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Ryan Scott Daniel TAYLOR, Defendant-Appellant
No. 16-40421
Summary Calendar
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Filed January 19, 2017
Krystal Dawn Walker, Renata Ann Gow-ie, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee
Ryan Scott Daniel Taylor, Pro Se
Before DAVIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Ryan Scott Daniel Taylor appeals an aspect of the sentence imposed after he pleaded guilty to credit card fraud and aggravated identity theft. He argues that the written judgment should be amended to accurately reflect the district court's oral pronouncement at sentencing that it would recommend that Taylor participate in the 500-hour Residential Drug Abuse Treatment Program (RDAP) offered by the Bureau of Prisons (BOP). The written judgment recommends only a non-specific drug treatment program. Taylor contends that the BOP has several drug treatment programs but that only the RDAP can result in a sentence reduction. The Government agrees that the oral and written judgments are in conflict and that a remand for correction of the written judgment is appropriate.
Accordingly, the written judgement is AMENDED to conform to the court's oral pronouncement recommending that Taylor participate in the RDAP specifically. See United States v. Wheeler, 322 F.3d 823, 828 (5th Cir. 2003); United States v. Castaneda, 494 Fed.Appx. 484, 485 (5th Cir. 2012) (unpublished); 28 U.S.C. § 2106. In all other respects to the judgment is AFFIRMED as amended. See Wheeler, 322 F.3d at 828; 28 U.S.C. § 2106.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.