United States v. Bush ( 2007 )

Opinions of the United
2007 Decisions States Court of Appeals
for the Third Circuit
12-12-2007
USA v. Bush
Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential
Docket No. 07-1974
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2007
Recommended Citation
"USA v. Bush" (2007). 2007 Decisions. Paper 81.
http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2007/81
This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova
University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2007 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova
University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.
CLD-54 NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
________________
No. 07-1974
________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
CLINTON BUSH,
Appellant
________________
On Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
(D.C. Crim. No. 98-cr-00370)
District Judge: Honorable William H. Yohn, Jr.
________________
Submitted for Possible Summary Action
Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 27.4 and I.O.P. 10.6
November 21, 2007
BEFORE: AMBRO, FUENTES and JORDAN, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed: December 12, 2007)
________________
OPINION
________________
PER CURIAM
In December 1998, Clinton Bush pleaded guilty to one count of possession of a
firearm by a former convicted felon. The District Court sentenced him to 180 months in
prison. Bush did not appeal. He did seek relief through 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and Rules
59(e) and 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, but his efforts were unavailing.
In March 2007, Bush filed a “motion for court to correct judgment and
commitment order.” Pursuant to Rule 36 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure,
Bush requested that the District Court correct the judgment order to reflect the reason
why he received 180 months’ imprisonment instead of 120 months’ imprisonment. In his
motion, Bush admits that he was sentenced to a term of 180 months. The District Court
denied Bush’s motion, noting that Bush was subject to a term of imprisonment not less
than 180 months under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1). Bush appeals.
We will summarily affirm the District Court’s order because no substantial issue is
presented on appeal. L.A.R. 27.4; I.O.P. 10.6. A court may correct a clerical error in a
judgment or order at any time. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 36. A clerical error involves an
inaccurate recording of a court’s statements or actions. See United States v. Bennett, 423
F.3d 271, 277-78 (3d Cir. 2005) (also emphasizing that “a court’s authority under Rule 36
is limited to the correction of clerical errors” only). Bush expressed a wish for a fuller
explanation of his sentence on the judgment page, but he did not complain of a clerical
error. His motion, like the order of judgment, describes his sentence as 180 months’
imprisonment. He did not identify any inaccuracy for the District Court to correct.
Accordingly, the District Court properly denied his motion.
2