Court Opinion

ID: 999930
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 17:32:48.669737+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:10:32.179242
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.                                                                    No. 98-4798

ALPHONZO R. GRIFFIN, a/k/a Fuzzy,
Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville.
William B. Traxler, Jr., District Judge.
(CR-96-907, CA-97-2987-6-21)

Submitted: August 24, 1999

Decided: September 29, 1999

Before WILKINS and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges,
and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Kurt Tavernier, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellant. E. Jean
Howard, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Green-
ville, South Carolina, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
Local Rule 36(c).
OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Alphonzo R. Griffin appeals his conviction and sentence after a
guilty plea to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to
distribute cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C.§ 846 (1994). Grif-
fin's attorney has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), raising one issue but stating that, in
his view, there are no meritorious grounds for appeal. Griffin was
informed of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but he failed
to file one.

Following a de novo review of the record, we find that the district
court complied with all the mandates of Rule 11 in accepting Griffin's
guilty plea. See United States v. Goins, 51 F.3d 400, 402 (4th Cir.
1995) (providing standard); Fed. R. Crim. P. 11. We also find no
plain error in the calculation of Griffin's sentence. In particular, Grif-
fin was correctly sentenced as a career offender. He was over eighteen
years old when he committed the instant felony offense, which
involved a controlled substance, and he had two prior felony convic-
tions. See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual§ 4B1.1 (1995).

In accordance with the requirements of Anders , we have reviewed
the record for potential error and have found none. Therefore, we
affirm Griffin's 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 peti-
tion would be frivolous, then counsel may move 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 argu-
ment because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before the court and argument would not aid in the
decisional process.

AFFIRMED

                     2