Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Michael Anthony SPENCER, a/k/a Jamaican Mike, a/k/a Martin Cabral Cole, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-10-10
Citations: 77 F. App'x 662
Docket Number: No. 02-4575
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Michael Anthony SPENCER, a/k/a Jamaican Mike, a/k/a Martin Cabral Cole, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 77
Pages: 662–663

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Michael Anthony SPENCER, a/k/a Jamaican Mike, a/k/a Martin Cabral Cole, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 02-4575.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted July 30, 2003.
Decided Oct. 10, 2003.
David Allen Downes, Front Royal, Virginia, for Appellant. Thomas Oliver Muck-low, Assistant United States Attorney, Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Michael Anthony Spencer seeks to appeal his sentence of 170 months' imprisonment imposed pursuant to a guilty plea and written plea agreement to distribution of crack cocaine within 1000 feet of a school, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), 860 (2000). Spencer's counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), alleging sentencing issues, but stating that in his view, the is sues were not meritorious. Spencer has filed a pro se supplemental brief challenging his sentence.
The Government has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal based on Spencer's waiver of the right to appeal his sentence contained in his plea agreement. We grant the Government's motion to dismiss because Spencer validly waived his right to appeal his sentence, and the only issues raised on appeal challenge Spencer's sentence. We deny Spencer's motion for new counsel.
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.