USA v. Clayton Bryan

Filing

Download PDF
USA v. Clayton Bryan Doc. 0 Case: 09-50794 Document: 00511182422 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/22/2010 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED N o . 09-50794 S u m m a r y Calendar July 22, 2010 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk U N IT E D STATES OF AMERICA, P la in t if f -A p p e lle e v. C L A Y T O N BOB BRYAN, D e fe n d a n t -A p p e lla n t A p p e a l from the United States District Court fo r the Western District of Texas U S D C No. 7:09-CR-68-3 B e fo r e GARZA, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* T h e attorney appointed to represent Clayton Bob Bryan has moved for le a v e to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 3 8 6 U.S. 738 (1967). Bryan has filed a response and motion for the appointment o f substitute counsel. Our independent review of the record, counsel's brief, and B r y a n 's response discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. T h e record does reveal a clerical error in the judgment. The judgment s h o u ld be corrected to reflect that Bryan was convicted and sentenced under 21 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. * Dockets.Justia.com Case: 09-50794 Document: 00511182422 Page: 2 No. 09-50794 Date Filed: 07/22/2010 U .S .C . §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A) and 846 rather than § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(C). See FED. R. CRIM. P. 36. A c c o r d in g ly , counsel's motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS D I S M I S S E D . See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. Bryan's motion for the appointment of s u b s t it u t e counsel is DENIED. See United States v. Wagner, 158 F.3d 901, 9020 3 (5th Cir. 1998). This matter is REMANDED for correction of the clerical e r r o r pursuant to FED. R. CRIM. P. 36. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?