UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-4801
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
DEMOND MCCRAVY,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District
Judge. (CR-99-433)
Submitted: April 13, 2000 Decided: April 19, 2000
Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Benjamin Thomas Stepp, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Green-
ville, South Carolina, for Appellant. Harold Watson Gowdy, III,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Demond McCravy appeals from his conviction and sentence im-
posed for armed bank robbery and brandishing a firearm during a
violent crime. McCravy’s attorney has filed a brief in accordance
with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), concluding that
there are no meritorious grounds for appeal, but raising the issues
of whether the district court complied with Fed. R. Crim. P. 11
when it accepted McCravy’s guilty plea and whether the district
court properly applied the United States Sentencing Guidelines to
the factual findings made at sentencing. Although McCravy was
informed of his right to file a supplemental brief, he has not done
so.
Our review of the record reveals that the district court com-
plied with Rule 11 and properly applied the Sentencing Guidelines
in its imposition of sentence. Pursuant to Anders, this court has
reviewed the record for potential error and has found none.
Accordingly, we affirm.
This court requires that counsel inform his client, in
writing, of the 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 friv-
olous, 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,
2
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