Did the Fifth Circuit misapply its restrictive interpretation of the mandate rule which does not permit de novo resentencing, but limits to resentencing to only those discrete particular issues identified by the appeals court for remand, when it affirmed petitioner's conviction for count one, vacated and remanded for resentencing on count two, but then permitted the district court to impose a different sentence for count one at resentencing?

No question identified. : Question Pr esented for Review Did the Fifth Circuit misapply its restrictive interpretation of the mandate rule whic h does not permit de novo resentencing, but limits to resentencing to only those discrete particular issue s identified by the appeals court for remand, when it affirm ed petitione r’s convic tion for count one, vacated and remanded for resentencing on count two, but then permitted the distric t court to im pose a diffe rent sentence for count one at resentencing? i List of Par ties The names of the parties are listed in the caption of this case. The Amended Judgm ent in a Criminal Case was issue d by the Hon. Nelva Gonz ales Ramos, Unite d States Distric t Judge for the Southe rn Distric t of Texas, Corpus Christi Division, and is included at Appe ndix Tab B. The United States Court of Appe als for the Fifth Circuit affirm ed the Amended Judgm ent in a Criminal Case in an unpublishe d per curiam opinion, at Appe ndix Tab A, with the panel consisting of the Hon. Jacques L. Weiner, Jr., the Hon. James C. Ho, and the Hon. Irma Carrillo Ramirez, Unite d States Circuit Judge s. ii Table of Conte nts Question Pre sented for R eview. i List of Pa rties. ii