Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Darrell Lamont WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-02-03
Citations: 55 F. App'x 190
Docket Number: No. 02-4490
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Darrell Lamont WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 55
Pages: 190–191

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Darrell Lamont WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 02-4490.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 23, 2003.
Decided Feb. 3, 2003.
Michael S. Seekings, Mullen, Wylie & Seekings, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellant. Miller Williams Shealy, Jr., Office of the United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before LUTTIG and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Darrell Lamont Williams appeals from his conviction and 240-month sentence pursuant to a guilty plea to the charge of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine and fifty grams or more of crack cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a), 846 (2000).
Williams' counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), in which he raises the issue of whether the district court correctly applied the Sentencing Guidelines. The mandatory statutory minimum for conspiracy to distribute more than fifty grams of cocaine base is twenty years. 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(l)(B)(iii) (2000). Therefore, the district court did not err by sentencing Williams to a term of 240 months.
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore affirm Williams' conviction 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.