United States v. Culley

Fifth Circuit

United States v. Culley

141 F. App'x 373

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedAugust 18, 2005

Docket04-60842

StatusUnpublished

This text of 141 F. App'x 373 (United States v. Culley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Culley, 141 F. App'x 373 (5th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

On appeal from the denial of a motion for modification of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), the Federal Public Defender, appointed appellate counsel for Willie Earl Culley (federal prisoner No. 02481-043), has filed a motion to withdraw pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Culley has filed responses to counsel’s motion.

There is no right to appointed counsel in an appeal from the denial of relief under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). United States v. Whitebird, 55 F.3d 1007, 1010-11 (5th Cir.1995). Nevertheless, as the district court *374 appointed counsel to represent Culley, we apply the principles enunciated in Anders to determine whether counsel should be permitted to withdraw. See Dinkins v. Alabama, 526 F.2d 1268, 1269 (5th Cir.1976).

The instant appeal is limited to the district court’s denial of the motion for modification of sentence. Our independent review of counsel’s brief, Culley’s responses, and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, the 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.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM: *

On appeal from the denial of a motion for modification of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), the Federal Public Defender, appointed appellate counsel for Willie Earl Culley (federal prisoner No. 02481-043), has filed a motion to withdraw pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Culley has filed responses to counsel’s motion.

There is no right to appointed counsel in an appeal from the denial of relief under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). United States v. Whitebird, 55 F.3d 1007, 1010-11 (5th Cir.1995). Nevertheless, as the district court *374 appointed counsel to represent Culley, we apply the principles enunciated in Anders to determine whether counsel should be permitted to withdraw. See Dinkins v. Alabama, 526 F.2d 1268, 1269 (5th Cir.1976).

The instant appeal is limited to the district court’s denial of the motion for modification of sentence. Our independent review of counsel’s brief, Culley’s responses, and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, the 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.

*

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

141 F. App'x 373, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-culley-ca5-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack