Case ID: f-appx_33/html/0686-01.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. Ernest Alexander ANDERSON, a/k/a Virginia E, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 01-4615.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted April 16, 2002.
    Decided May 3, 2002.
    
      John B. Mann, Levit, Mann & Halligan, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Nancy Spodick Healey, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Ernest Alexander Anderson pled guilty pursuant to a plea agreement to one count of carrying and using a firearm during and in relation to a drug trafficking offense, causing death by murder through the use of the firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 924(j)(l) (West 2000). He was sentenced to 600 months imprisonment followed by five years supervised release, and a $500 fine. Anderson appeals.

Counsel for Anderson has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), stating that he has found no meritorious claims for appeal. Anderson, informed of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, has not done so. In his brief counsel reviews the constitutional requirements for the guilty plea and sentencing. He states that his review of the record discloses “no substantial or meaningful” violations of Fed.R.Crim.P. 11 or Fed.R.Crim.P. 32.

In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record in this case and find no meritorious issues. Therefore, we affirm Anderson’s conviction and sentence.

Counsel moves this court to allow him to withdraw as counsel for Anderson on the ground that he has found no meritorious issues for appeal. This court requires that counsel inform his client, in writing, of the chent’s right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If the client requests that such a petition be filed but counsel believes that it would be frivolous to do so, 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 the client.

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.