Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Joseph Lonnie HODGE, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-01-22
Citations: 55 F. App'x 144
Docket Number: No. 02-4518
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Joseph Lonnie HODGE, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 55
Pages: 144–145

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Joseph Lonnie HODGE, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 02-4518.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 16, 2003.
Decided Jan. 22, 2003.
Matthew A. Victor, Victor, Victor & Hel-goe, L.L.P., Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellant. Anna Mills Wagoner, United States Attorney, Lisa B. Boggs, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Joseph L. Hodge pleaded guilty to violating the terms of his supervised release. The district court entered an order revoking Hodge's supervised release, and sentencing him to eleven months incarceration and twenty-five months of supervised release. Hodge's counsel has filed an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), asserting Hodge was not competent to participate in the proceeding. Hodge's claim is meritless. Hodge cannot show he was unable to rationally consult with his lawyer, or unable to understand the proceeding against him. Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402, 402, 80 S.Ct. 788, 4 L.Ed.2d 824 (1960) (per curiam); United States v. Mason, 52 F.3d 1286, 1289 (4th Cir.1995).
Accordingly, we affirm the district court order. United States v. Hodge, No. CR-02-19 (M.D.N.C. July 2, 2002). In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record in this case and find no other meritorious issues for 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.
AFFIRMED.