United States of America v. Lyle Gerald Johns

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
LYLE GERALD JOHNS,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 15-10060
D.C. No. 4:91-cr-00392-CKJ
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Cindy K. Jorgenson, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 18, 2015**
Before: TASHIMA, OWENS, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Lyle Gerald Johns appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his
Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 36 motion to correct the presentence report.
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
NOV 23 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 2 --

Johns contends that the presentence report erroneously states that he was
“the leader of five persons or more” and therefore subject to an aggravating role
enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(a). We review for clear error the denial of a
Rule 36 motion. See United States v. Dickie, 752 F.2d 1398, 1400 (9th Cir. 1985)
(per curiam). Assuming without deciding that Rule 36 applies to presentence
reports, the district court properly denied Johns’s motion because the statement in
the presentence report is not a clerical error. See United States v. Penna, 319 F.3d
509, 513 (9th Cir. 2003) (“Rule 36 is a vehicle for correcting clerical mistakes but
it may not be used to correct judicial errors in sentencing.”). Furthermore, Johns’s
challenge to the presentence report was rejected by the court on the merits prior to
sentencing.
AFFIRMED.
15-10060 2

-- 2 of 2 --