United States v. Catherine Salas ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •      Case: 18-11254      Document: 00514982439         Page: 1    Date Filed: 06/04/2019
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    No. 18-11254                            FILED
    Conference Calendar                     June 4, 2019
    Lyle W. Cayce
    Clerk
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee
    v.
    CATHERINE SALAS,
    Defendant-Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Northern District of Texas
    USDC No. 3:16-CR-56-12
    Before KING, ELROD, and WILLETT, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM: *
    The attorney appointed to represent Catherine Salas 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).
    Salas 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.
    * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 18-11254    Document: 00514982439     Page: 2   Date Filed: 06/04/2019
    No. 18-11254
    Our review of the record reveals an error in the amount of the restitution
    award. The judgment incorrectly states that J.D. is due restitution in the
    amount of $42,823. Based on the figures used to compute the restitution award
    at sentencing, J.D. is owed restitution in the amount of $42,822. The judgment
    correctly states that Lion Diamond Group, Incorporated is due restitution in
    the amount of $165,000.
    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. This matter is REMANDED for the limited
    purpose of correcting the error in the judgment. See FED. R. CRIM. P. 36.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 18-11254

Filed Date: 6/4/2019

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 6/5/2019