Case ID: f-appx_30/html/0158-01.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. Robert D. ZINNAMON, a/k/a Robert Gerald, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 01-4570.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 15, 2002.
    Decided March 1, 2002.
    
      Mary Lou Newberger, Acting Federal Public Defender, Edward H. Weis, First Assistant Federal Public Defender, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellant. Charles T. Miller, United States Attorney, Miller A. Bushong, III, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
   OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Robert D. Zinnamon appeals his sentence, upon revocation of his supervised release, to seven months incarceration followed by twenty-nine months supervised release. Zinnamon’s attorney filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), stating there are no meritorious issues for appeal. On Zinnamon’s behalf, counsel contends 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3) (1988 & Supp. V) (current version at 18 U.S.C. § 3538(e)(3) (1994)), required the district court to give Zinnamon credit for time served on supervised release when it sentenced him to a second term of supervised release. Although advised of his right to do so, Zinnamon has not filed a pro se supplemental brief.

We have reviewed the entire record in this case in accordance with the requirements of Anders and find no error in Zinnamon’s sentence and no meritorious issues for appeal. See 18 U.S.C § 3583(e)(3) (1988 & Supp. V); Johnson v. United States, 529 U.S. 694, 703-13, 120 S.Ct. 1795, 146 L.Ed.2d 727 (2000). We therefore affirm Zinnamon’s sentence.

We require that counsel inform his client, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Zinnamon 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 Zinnamon. 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.

AFFIRMED.