United States v. Gabriel Rangel ( 2018 )

Case: 17-50384 Document: 00514408291 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/29/2018
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
No. 17-50384
Fifth Circuit
FILED
Summary Calendar March 29, 2018
Lyle W. Cayce
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Clerk
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
GABRIEL RANGEL,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 6:16-CR-35-1
Before DAVIS, CLEMENT, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Rangel 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). Rangel 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
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 17-50384 Document: 00514408291 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/29/2018
No. 17-50384
appellate review. See United States v. Pesina-Rodriguez, 825 F.3d 787, 788
(5th Cir. 2016).
Our review reveals clerical errors in the written judgment concerning
the description of Rangel’s offense and the applicable statutory provisions.
Specifically, the judgment reflects that Rangel was convicted and sentenced for
conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine under 21
U.S.C. § 846 rather than for possession with intent to distribute
methamphetamine under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(C).
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 clerical errors in the judgment. See FED. R. CRIM. P.
36; United States v. Johnson, 588 F.2d 961, 964 (5th Cir. 1979).
2