Court Opinion

ID: 994387
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 00:22:33.649291+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:01:35.476607
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.
                                                                No. 97-4860
FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT HUNT, a/k/a
Fella,
Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg.
Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge.
(CR-96-1022)

Submitted: February 27, 1998

Decided: March 20, 1998

Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and
HALL, Senior Circuit Judge.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Edward M. Sauvain, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellant.
E. Jean Howard, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY,
Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.

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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Franklin Roosevelt Hunt appeals from his conviction, pursuant to
a guilty plea, of one count of conspiracy to possess with intent to dis-
tribute cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 846
(1994). Hunt's attorney has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), certifying that Hunt's appeal does
not present any meritorious issues. Hunt was informed of his right to
file a pro se supplemental brief and has not done so. Because we find
no reversible error, we affirm.

Counsel asserts that the district court complied with Fed. R. Crim.
P. 11 in taking Hunt's guilty plea. We agree. The court properly
determined that Hunt was competent to enter a plea, that he under-
stood the charge against him, the maximum and minimum sentence,
and the fine. Hunt also stated that he understood the court was obli-
gated to consider the applicable sentencing guidelines. The court also
conducted a review of the plea agreement. Hunt stated that he was not
promised anything other than what was in the plea agreement. Hunt
was informed of the rights he was waiving by entering a guilty plea.
Finally, the district court properly found a sound factual basis for
accepting the guilty plea.

We also agree with counsel's contention that Hunt's sentence does
not present any appealable issue. Hunt did not have any objections to
Presentence Investigation Report. Hunt's offense level was calculated
to be thirty-six, and he was placed in Criminal History Category III.
He was sentenced to 235 months' imprisonment, the lowest possible
sentence within his guidelines range.

Pursuant to the requirements of Anders, this court has reviewed the
record for potential error and has found none. Therefore, we affirm
Hunt's conviction and sentence. This court requires that counsel

                     2
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 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

                     3