Court Opinion

ID: 9388589
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-21 00:00:30.76671+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:21.172303
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-50492         Document: 00516720272             Page: 1      Date Filed: 04/20/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________
                                                                                United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit
                                       No. 22-50492
                                     Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                     ____________                                  April 20, 2023
                                                                                  Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                           Clerk

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Nichole Pittman,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                           for the Western District of Texas
                                USDC No. 7:22-CR-13-2
                      ______________________________

   Before Elrod, Southwick, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          The attorney appointed to represent Nichole Pittman has moved for
   leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California,
   386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011).
   Pittman has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the
   relevant portions of the record reflected in the brief. We concur with

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-50492      Document: 00516720272          Page: 2   Date Filed: 04/20/2023

                                    No. 22-50492

   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 in this case,
   and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
          Our review reveals a clerical error in the written judgment. The
   district court ordered orally that Pittman’s sentence will run consecutively to
   any sentence imposed in a pending charge in the 161st Judicial District Court
   in Odessa, Texas, case number B-22-0069-CR. The written judgment,
   however, notes that her sentence will run concurrently to any sentence
   imposed in B-22-0069-CR. “The terms of an oral pronouncement that
   clearly provide for a consecutive or concurrent sentence control a contrary,
   silent or ambiguous written judgment.” United States v. McAfee, 832 F.2d
   944, 946 (5th Cir. 1987). Accordingly, this matter is REMANDED for the
   limited purpose of correcting the clerical error in the judgment. See Fed. R.
   Crim. P. 36.

                                             2