United States v. Brown , 98 F. App'x 258 ( 2004 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 03-4562
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    JOHN NASSHON BROWN,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior
    District Judge. (CR-02-125)
    Submitted:   May 27, 2004                   Decided:   June 2, 2004
    Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam
    opinion.
    Edwin L. West, III, EDWIN L. WEST, III, P.L.L.C., Wilmington, North
    Carolina, for Appellant.    Anne Margaret Hayes, Assistant United
    States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    John Nasshon Brown pled guilty to bank robbery and aiding
    and abetting, 
    18 U.S.C. §§ 2113
    , 2 (2000), and was sentenced to 94
    months imprisonment.       On appeal, his counsel has filed a brief in
    accordance with Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
     (1967), alleging
    that there are no meritorious claims for appeal, but addressing
    whether the district court should have departed based on diminished
    mental capacity.        See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual, § 5K2.13
    (2002).     Although informed of the right to do so, Brown has not
    filed a pro se supplemental brief.
    Because the court correctly understood its authority to
    depart in this case, we lack jurisdiction to review its decision
    not to depart under § 5K2.13.        See United States v. Carr, 
    303 F.3d 539
    , 545 (4th Cir. 2002), cert. denied, 
    537 U.S. 1138
     (2003);
    United    States   v.    Bayerle,   
    898 F.2d 28
    ,   31   (4th   Cir.   1990).
    Accordingly, we dismiss this portion of the appeal.
    We have examined the entire record in this case in
    accordance with the requirements of Anders and find no meritorious
    issues for appeal.        Therefore, we affirm Brown’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 petition would be
    frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to
    - 2 -
    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 IN PART, DISMISSED IN PART
    - 3 -
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 03-4562

Citation Numbers: 98 F. App'x 258

Judges: King, Michael, Per Curiam, Widener

Filed Date: 6/2/2004

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/6/2023