Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eugene Antonio GOVAN, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-12-09
Citations: 624 F. App'x 737
Docket Number: No. 15-11140
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eugene Antonio GOVAN, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before WILLIAM PRYOR, JILL PRYOR and FAY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 624
Pages: 737–738

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eugene Antonio GOVAN, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-11140
Non-Argument Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
Dec. 9, 2015.
Germaine Seider, Arthur Lee Bentley, III, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Tampa, FL, Nicole M. Andrejko, J. Bishop Ravenel, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Orlando, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Thomas H. Dale, Dale Law Firm, PA, Orlando, FL, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before WILLIAM PRYOR, JILL PRYOR and FAY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Tom Dale, appointed counsel for Eugene Govan in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of Mr. Govan and prepared 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 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 Mr. Govan's conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED. Because the final judgment incorrectly listed the offense of conviction as 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), 924(e)(4) — and because § 924 subsection (e)(4) does not exist — we VACATE and REMAND for the limited purpose of correcting this clerical error.