United States v. Payne , 36 F. App'x 74 ( 2002 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 01-4985
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    KENNETH RAYMOND PAYNE, JR.,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
    District of North Carolina, at Durham. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr.,
    Chief District Judge. (CR-00-98)
    Submitted:   April 30, 2002                   Decided:   May 31, 2002
    Before KING and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Thomas N. Cochran, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greensboro,
    North Carolina, for Appellant. Anna Mills Wagoner, United States
    Attorney, Clifton T. Barrett, Assistant United States Attorney,
    Randall S. Galyon, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro,
    North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    Kenneth Raymond Payne, Jr., pled guilty under a plea agreement
    to one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm in
    violation of 
    18 U.S.C.A. §§ 922
    (g)(1), 924(a)(2) (West 2000).            The
    district court sentenced him to 120 months in prison and three
    years of supervised release.          The district court ordered the
    sentence to run concurrently with the twelve-month sentence Payne
    was serving for possession with intent to sell and deliver cocaine
    and possession of stolen goods, and consecutively to all other
    state sentences he was currently serving. Payne’s attorney filed a
    brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
     (1967),
    raising the issue of whether Payne’s sentence was unfairly harsh.
    Payne was informed of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief
    but has not done so.
    In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record
    and have found no meritorious issues for appeal.               We therefore
    affirm Payne’s conviction and sentence. We deny counsel’s motion to
    withdraw and require 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 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
    2
    the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
    materials   before   the   court   and   argument   would   not   aid   the
    decisional process.
    AFFIRMED
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-4985

Citation Numbers: 36 F. App'x 74

Judges: Gregory, Hamilton, King, Per Curiam

Filed Date: 5/31/2002

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/6/2023