Case ID: f-appx_390/html/0258-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Adelaide L. GILMORE, a/k/a Adelaide K. Williams, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 10-4217.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: July 14, 2010.
    Decided: Aug. 6, 2010.
    Dennis M. Hart, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Joseph Kosky, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
    
      Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
   Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Adelaide L. Gilmore appeals the district court’s order denying her motion for release pending the appeal. Gilmore’s counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), stating that there are no meritorious issues justifying release pending appeal but questioning whether Gilmore has presented a substantial issue in her appeal of her conviction and sixty-month sentence for making a false statement to obtain federal employees’ compensation. Because we have dismissed Gilmore’s appeal from the underlying criminal judgment, her appeal from the court’s order denying release pending appeal is moot.

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. This court requires that counsel inform Gilmore, in writing, of her right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Gilmore requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Gilmore. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED. 
      
       Counsel notified Gilmore of her right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but Gilmore has not filed one.