Case ID: f-appx_310/html/0644-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Carl GOLDEN, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 08-30071
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Feb. 12, 2009.
    Catherine M. Maraist, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Middle District of Louisiana, Baton Rouge, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    James Rodney Baum, Baton Rouge, LA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before WIENER, STEWART, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

The attorney appointed to represent Carl Golden 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). Golden has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal in connection with the sentence imposed upon resentencing. 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. Counsel’s alternative motion to remand for a ruling on a certificate of appealability is DENIED. See Pope v. MCI Telecommunications Corp., 937 F.2d 258, 266 (5th Cir.1991). 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.