
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Terry W. POUNCY, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Randy L. Randall, Defendant-Appellant United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Reginald D. Lee, Defendant-Appellant.
    Nos. 12-31181, 12-31193, 12-31194
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Aug. 23, 2013.
    Josette Louise Cassiere, Assistant U.S. Attorney, James G. Cowles, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Shreveport, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    John Broocks Greer, III, Broocks Greer, L.L.C., Francis Michael Carmody, Shreveport, LA, Ross Edward Shacklette, Bossier City, LA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Randy L. Randall, Forrest City, AR, pro se.
    Before WIENER, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Counsel appointed to represent Terry Pouncy on appeal has filed a motion to withdraw and a brief that relies on Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Pouncy 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.

The record does reveal two clerical errors in the judgment, which stated an offense of conviction as “conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute [cocaine],” where the indictment and the guilty plea recognized that offense of conviction as “possession with intent to distribute cocaine.” The judgment should be corrected to reflect that Pouncy was convicted of possession with intent to distribute. See FED. R. CRIM. P. 36. With respect to Count 8, the judgment should be corrected to reflect the right code number of 18 (rather than 21) U.S.C. § 924(c)(1). Id.

Accordingly, Pouncy’s counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and as to Pouncy only (Case No. 12-31181) his APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. His case is REMANDED for correction of the clerical errors pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 36. 
      
       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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.
     