USA v. Tares Hearn


UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [17-30171 Dismissed as Frivolous and Remanded ] Judge: CDK , Judge: JWE , Judge: SAH Mandate issue date is 12/18/2017 for Appellant Tares Terrell Hearn; granting motion to withdraw as counsel [8512398-2] [17-30171]

Download PDF
Case: 17-30171 Document: 00514248140 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/24/2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 17-30171 Summary Calendar FILED November 24, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. TARES TERRELL HEARN, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 5:16-CR-133-1 Before KING, ELROD, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Tares Terrell Hearn 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). Hearn 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 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. * Case: 17-30171 Document: 00514248140 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/24/2017 No. 17-30171 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. However, the judgment contains an apparent typographical error in listing the statutes under which Hearn was convicted. We therefore REMAND to the district court for correction of this clerical error. See 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?