Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Timothy J. EDENBURN, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-06-26
Citations: 69 F. App'x 151
Docket Number: No. 02-4711
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Timothy J. EDENBURN, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 69
Pages: 151–152

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Timothy J. EDENBURN, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 02-4711.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted June 6, 2003.
Decided June 26, 2003.
Frank W. Dunham, Jr., Federal Public Defender, Larry M. Dash, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellant. Laura P. Tayman, Office of the United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Timothy J. Edenburn seeks to appeal his conviction and 64-month sentence imposed pursuant to a guilty plea and written plea agreement to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute MDMA (ecstasy), in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), 846 (2000). The Government has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. We grant the Government's motion to dismiss because Edenburn waived his right to appeal his sentence in his written plea agreement, and the only issue raised on appeal is a challenge to Edenburn's sentence. Further, the brief filed on Edenburn's behalf pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), acknowledges that Edenburn's guilty plea was knowing and voluntary. Edenburn has failed to file a pro se supplemental brief despite being notified of his opportunity to do so. In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record in this case and have found no 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. 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.