The attorney appointed to represent Miguel Angel Jaimes-Jurado has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Jaimes-Jurado has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur *287 with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review.

However, there exists a clerical error in the written judgment. The written judgment reflects that Jaimes-Jurado was convicted under “8 U.S.G, § 13263(a) and (b)(2).” The correct statute of conviction is § 1326.

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. The case is REMANDED to the district court for the limited purpose of correcting a clerical error in the judgment. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 36.