USA v. Edgar Munoz-Munoz, No. 12-40609 (5th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 12-40609 Document: 00512209933 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/16/2013 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 12-40609 Conference Calendar April 16, 2013 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. EDGAR ALEXIS MUNOZ-MUNOZ, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 1:11-CR-966-3 Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* The attorney appointed to represent Edgar Alexis Munoz-Munoz 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). Munoz-Munoz 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 12-40609 Document: 00512209933 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/16/2013 No. 12-40609 The record does reveal a clerical error in the judgment which stated the offense of conviction as Possession With Intent to Distribute a Quantity Exceeding Fifty (50) Grams, that is, Approximately 1.3 Grams of Methamphetamine, where the indictment, the guilty plea, and the district court at sentencing recognized the offense of conviction as possession with intent to distribute a quantity exceeding 50 grams, that is, approximately, 1.3 kilograms, of methamphetamine. The judgment should be corrected to reflect that MunozMunoz was convicted of possession with intent to distribute a quantity exceeding 50 grams, that is, approximately, 1.3 kilograms, of methamphetamine. See FED. R. CRIM. P. 36. 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 correction of the clerical error pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 36. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
