United States v. Studgon , 88 F. App'x 615 ( 2004 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-4700
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
LARRY TERRAY STUDGON, a/k/a Terray Sterns,
a/k/a Bryan James,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District
Judge. (CR-02-1244)
Submitted: February 19, 2004 Decided: February 25, 2004
Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Andrew R. Mackenzie, BARRETT & MACKENZIE, L.L.C., Greenville, South
Carolina, for Appellant. Alan Lance Crick, Assistant United States
Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Larry Studgon pleaded guilty to being a felon in
possession of ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1),
924(a)(2) (2000). Studgon was sentenced to fifty-seven months
incarceration, three years supervised release, and a $100 special
assessment. His attorney has filed an appeal under Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), alleging his trial counsel
provided ineffective assistance. We review this claim to assess
whether the record conclusively establishes Studgon’s trial counsel
was ineffective. We hold the record does not conclusively
establish Studgon’s trial counsel was ineffective. We deny relief
on this claim without prejudice to Studgon’s ability to allege
ineffective assistance on collateral review. United States v.
Richardson, 195 F.3d 192, 198 (4th Cir. 1999); United States v.
King, 119 F.3d 290, 295 (4th Cir. 1997).
Accordingly, we affirm Studgon’s conviction and sentence.
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record in
this case and find no other 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
- 2 -
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 -