UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-4022
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
FELTON TABOR,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District
Judge. (CR-01-50)
Submitted: June 7, 2002 Decided: June 24, 2002
Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
C. Carlyle Steele, Jr., Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellant.
Regan Alexandra Pendleton, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Felton Tabor appeals his sentence imposed by the district
court. Felton’s counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting there are no meritorious
issues for appeal, but addressing the propriety of the district
court’s plea hearing conducted pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11.
Tabor has also filed an informal brief on his own behalf raising
several additional contentions. We have reviewed the plea hearing
and the colloquy the district court undertook with Tabor. We find
the court fully complied with Rule 11 and that Tabor’s plea was
knowing and voluntary. Moreover, we find the issues raised in
Tabor’s informal brief to be without merit. Accordingly, we affirm
the district court’s judgment.
We have examined the entire record in this case in accordance
with the requirements of Anders and find no 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 representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a
copy thereof was served on the client. Finally, we dispense with
oral argument, because the facts and legal contentions are
2
adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument
would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
3