United States v. Willie Lee Council, 7 F.3d 227, 4th Cir. (1993)
Uploaded by
Scribd Government DocsUnited States v. Willie Lee Council, 7 F.3d 227, 4th Cir. (1993)
Uploaded by
Scribd Government Docs7 F.
3d 227
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of
unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
Circuit.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Willie Lee COUNCIL, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 92-5562.
United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: February 18, 1993.
Decided: September 28, 1993.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of
North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, Sr., District Judge. (CR89-155-D)
Urs Roland Gsteiger, Wilson & Iseman, Winston-Salem, North Carolina,
for Appellant.
Robert H. Edmunds, Jr., United States Attorney, Richard S. Glaser, Jr.,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
M.D.N.C.
AFFIRMED.
Before WIDENER, MURNAGHAN, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
OPINION
Willie Lee Council pled guilty to possession of firearms by a convicted felon, in
violation of 18 U.S.C.A. 922(g) (West Supp. 1992). He now appeals. His
attorney has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
(1967), stating that there are no meritorious issues for appeal. Council was
advised of his right to file a separate brief; however, he has filed nothing in
support of his appeal. We affirm.
A review of the plea proceeding reflects full compliance with Fed. R. Crim. P.
11. Similarly, our review of the sentence reflects that Wright's sentence was
imposed in accord with the plea agreement and was not objected to by any
party, either in the district court or on appeal.
In accordance with the requirements of Anders, supra, we have examined the
entire record in this case and find no meritorious issues for appeal. Pursuant to
the plan adopted by the Fourth Circuit Judicial Council in implementation of
the Criminal Justice Act of 1964 (18 U.S.C. 3006A (West 1985 & Supp.
1992)), this Court requires that counsel inform his client, in writing, of his right
to petition the Supreme Court for further review. If requested by his client to do
so, counsel should prepare a timely petition for a writ of certiorari.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the record and briefs, and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED
