Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Larry Tyrone ADAMS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-06-18
Citations: 608 F. App'x 238
Docket Number: No. 14-40665
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Larry Tyrone ADAMS, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before REAVLEY, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 608
Pages: 238–240

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Larry Tyrone ADAMS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-40665
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
June 18, 2015.
Ernest Gonzalez, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Plano, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Phillip Linder, Esq., Barrett Bright Las-siter Linder, Dallas, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before REAVLEY, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The attorney appointed to represent Larry Tyrone Adams 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). Adams has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel's brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. 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 reflects a clerical error in the written judgment in that the judgment indicates that Adams was' convicted of the offense of conspiring to "Possess with the Intent to Manufacture and Distribute" methamphetamine, whereas Adams pleaded guilty to conspiring to possess with the intent to distribute methamphetamine, as charged in the Second Superseding Indictment. Accordingly, we REMAND for the limited purpose of 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.