UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. No. 96-4950

RODNEY GAITHER,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill.

Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge.

(CR-96-15)

Submitted: October 21, 1997

Decided: November 17, 1997

Before MURNAGHAN and ERVIN, Circuit Judges, and

BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

_________________________________________________________________

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

John A. O'Leary, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. Marshall

Prince, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).
OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Pursuant to a plea agreement, Rodney Gaither pled guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine and cocaine base,

in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (1994), and waived his rights to

appeal his conviction and sentence. The district court sentenced Gaither to 120 months imprisonment--the statutory mandatory minimum

sentence--to be followed by a five-year term of supervised release.

Gaither appeals his sentence. Gaither's counsel has filed a brief in

accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating

that, in his view, there are no meritorious issues for appeal. In subsequent submissions to the court, Gaither states that he thought his

guilty plea would result in a sentence of five and one-half years

imprisonment and that he was entitled to a sentence reduction based

upon his full cooperation with the authorities. Because Gaither

expressly waived his right to appeal, we dismiss the appeal.

The transcript of Gaither's Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 hearing reveals that

he understood the full significance of the waiver provision of his plea

agreement.1 When the district court specifically asked Gaither about

the waiver, Gaither stated that he understood he was waiving his right

to appeal. On these facts, we find that Gaither's waiver is knowing

and intelligent.2 Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.

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.

DISMISSED

_________________________________________________________________

1 See United States v. Broughton-Jones, 71 F.3d 1143, 1146 (4th Cir.

1995) (waiver valid if knowing and intelligent).

2 United States v. Wessells, 936 F.2d 165, 167 (4th Cir. 1991); United

States v. Wiggins, 905 F.2d 51, 53 (4th Cir. 1990).

 2