Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. John Rashon HYDER, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-07-07
Citations: 609 F. App'x 227
Docket Number: No. 14-10665
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. John Rashon HYDER, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before PRADO, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 609
Pages: 227–228

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. John Rashon HYDER, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-10665
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
July 7, 2015.
James Wesley Hendrix, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Gabriel Reyes, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Dallas, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
John Rashon Hyder, FCI Seagoville, Seagoville, TX, pro se.
Before PRADO, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
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, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir.2011). Hy-der 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 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, Hy-der 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, — U.S.-, 134 S.Ct. 2319, 189 L.Ed.2d 196 (2014); United States v. Rosales, 448 Fed.Appx. 466, 466-67 (5th Cir.2011).
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.