United States v. Griffin ( 2000 )


Menu:
  • UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee,
    v.                                                                       No. 99-4379
    LARON GRIFFIN,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston.
    Patrick Michael Duffy, District Judge.
    (CR-97-943)
    Submitted: December 22, 1999
    Decided: January 14, 2000
    Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
    _________________________________________________________________
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    _________________________________________________________________
    COUNSEL
    N. Elliott Barnwell, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellant. Miller
    Williams Shealy, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTOR-
    NEY, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.
    _________________________________________________________________
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
    Local Rule 36(c).
    _________________________________________________________________
    OPINION
    PER CURIAM:
    Laron Griffin pled guilty to conspiracy to possess with the intent
    to distribute and to distribute cocaine and crack cocaine, 
    21 U.S.C. § 846
     (1994). The district court initially imposed a 210-month sen-
    tence. The district court thereafter granted Griffin's Fed. R. Crim. P.
    35 motion to correct his sentence and, upon resentencing, reduced
    Griffin's term of imprisonment to 168 months. Following the filing
    of a timely notice of appeal, Griffin's attorney has filed a brief in
    accordance with Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
     (1967). Counsel
    states that there are no meritorious grounds for appeal, but raises the
    following issues: whether the district court erred in refusing to admit
    privileged statements made by some of Griffin's co-conspirators to
    their respective attorneys in the absence of a waiver of attorney-client
    privilege and of their Fifth Amendment rights, and whether the poly-
    graph questions that were administered to Griffin prior to his resen-
    tencing were overly broad and constituted grounds to reverse his
    sentence. We have reviewed counsel's arguments, Griffin's pro se
    supplemental brief, and the record, and we find no reversible error.
    We have further examined the entire record in this case in accor-
    dance with the requirements of Anders, and find no meritorious issues
    for appeal. This Court requires that counsel inform his client, in writ-
    ing, 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 coun-
    sel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may
    move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Coun-
    sel's motion must state that a copy thereof was served on the client.
    We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten-
    tions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and
    argument would not aid the decisional process.
    AFFIRMED
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 99-4379

Filed Date: 1/14/2000

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014