Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Anthony D. WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-06-24
Citations: 531 F. App'x 829
Docket Number: No. 12-10148
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Anthony D. WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: TALLMAN, M. SMITH, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 531
Pages: 829–829

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Anthony D. WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 12-10148.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 18, 2013.
Filed June 24, 2013.
Ryan P. Dejoe, Assistant U.S. Office of the U.S. Attorney Tucson, AZ, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Anthony D. Williams, Anthony, TX, pro se.
Before: TALLMAN, M. SMITH, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Federal prisoner Anthony D. Williams appeals pro se from the district court's order denying his motion for clarification of his orally pronounced sentence. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Williams contends that the district court should have issued an order clarifying that he was not sentenced as a career offender under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1. Because the record supports the district court's conclusion that Williams was sentenced as a career offender, the court did not err by denying his motion.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.