Case ID: f-appx_95/html/0490-01.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. Shapria CHAPMAN, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 03-4712.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted April 15, 2004.
    Decided April 20, 2004.
    Randolph M. Lee, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Anne Margaret Hayes, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before NIEMEYER and GERGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 86(c).
   PER CURIAM.

Appellant Shapria Chapman pled guilty to one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm and one count of possessing a firearm with an obliterated serial number, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 922(k) and 924 (2000). He was sentenced to thirty months in prison.

Chapman’s appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967) raising two issues regarding Chapman’s sentence: (1) whether the district court properly increased his offense level by four because of the number of firearms involved in Chapman’s conduct; and (2) whether the district court erroneously enhanced Chapman’s offense level by two for being a manager of criminal conduct. The Government has elected not to file a brief. Chapman was notified of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief and has not done so.

We have independently reviewed the entire record in this case, including the issues raised by counsel, and, in accordance with Anders, have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore affirm Chapman’s convictions and sentence. This court requires that counsel inform his client, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If the client 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 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