United States v. Patience Okoroji

Fifth Circuit

United States v. Patience Okoroji

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided May 24, 2019·No. 18-11371·Unpublished

Opinion

Case: 18-11371 Document: 00514970642 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/24/2019

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

FILED No. 18-11371 May 24, 2019 Conference Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

PATIENCE OKOROJI,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:15-CR-559-1

Before REAVLEY, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Patience Okoroji 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). Okoroji 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 18-11371 Document: 00514970642 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/24/2019

No. 18-11371

Our review reveals a clerical error in the written judgment concerning the amount of restitution. The judgment correctly states that the amount of restitution is $8,650,705.82 but also erroneously states the amount of restitution is $8,650,785.82. The order setting additional conditions of supervised release also reflects the erroneous amount of restitution. 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 error in the judgment and the order setting additional conditions of supervised release. See FED. R. CRIM. P. 36; United States v. Johnson, 588 F.2d 961, 964 (5th Cir. 1979).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Case: 18-11371 Document: 00514970642 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/24/2019

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

FILED No. 18-11371 May 24, 2019 Conference Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

PATIENCE OKOROJI,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:15-CR-559-1

Before REAVLEY, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Patience Okoroji 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). Okoroji 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: 18-11371 Document: 00514970642 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/24/2019

No. 18-11371

Our review reveals a clerical error in the written judgment concerning the amount of restitution. The judgment correctly states that the amount of restitution is $8,650,705.82 but also erroneously states the amount of restitution is $8,650,785.82. The order setting additional conditions of supervised release also reflects the erroneous amount of restitution. 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 error in the judgment and the order setting additional conditions of supervised release. See FED. R. CRIM. P. 36; United States v. Johnson, 588 F.2d 961, 964 (5th Cir. 1979).

United States v. Patience Okoroji, (5th Cir. 2019).

Pincite

United States v. Patience Okoroji (United States v. Patience Okoroji) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related