     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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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).




                                       2
