
    UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Curtis Waheed RASOOL, Appellant.
    No. 06-2623.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: March 7, 2008.
    Filed: March 17, 2008.
    Jane W. Duke, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Little Rock, AR, for Appellee.
    Curtis Waheed Rasool, Beaumont, TX, pro se.
    Denese R. Fletcher-Preston, Little Rock, AR, for Appellant.
    Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
    [UNPUBLISHED]
   PER CURIAM.

In this direct criminal appeal, counsel for Curtis Waheed Rasool has filed a motion seeking leave to withdraw and a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and Rasool has filed a pro se supplemental brief. Rasool pleaded guilty to a drug-conspiracy charge and was sentenced to 159 months in prison and 10 years of supervised release. The district court entered judgment on May 23, 2006. Rasool’s pro se notice of appeal, dated June 12 and postmarked June 15, was date-stamped as received by the district court on June 19. Even if the notice of appeal is deemed filed on June 12, it was not filed within 10 days of entry of judgment and is therefore untimely. See Fed. R.App. P. 4(b)(l)(A)(i). A district court may, however, grant a defendant an additional 30 days in which to file a notice of appeal upon a showing of excusable neglect or good cause. See Fed. RApp. P. 4(b)(4).

Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is held in abeyance and the case, is remanded to the district court to determine whether the time for filing a notice of appeal should be extended under Rule 4(b)(4). See United States v. Petty, 82 F.3d 809, 810 (8th Cir.1996) (per curiam). Upon ruling, the district court shall promptly return the case to this court for dismissal or further proceedings, as may be appropriate. 
      
      . The Honorable George Howard, Jr., late a United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
     