UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-4083
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
DANIEL WAYNE CADE,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Parkersburg. Joseph Robert Goodwin,
District Judge. (CR-01-200)
Submitted: July 23, 2002 Decided: August 8, 2002
Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Patricia A. Kurelac, Moundsville, West Virginia, for Appellant.
Kasey Warner, United States Attorney, Miller A. Bushong, III,
Assistant United States Attorney, Huntington, West Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Daniel Wayne Cade pled guilty to one count of distribution of
methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (2000), and
one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation
of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2) (2000). Cade’s attorney filed
a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
(1967), stating there are no meritorious issues for appeal. Cade
has filed a pro se supplemental brief raising the following claims:
(1) the search pursuant to a warrant violated his right to due
process; (2) the prosecutor acted vindictively in prosecuting the
case; and (3) counsel was ineffective for failing to consider an
appeal. Finding no reversible error, we affirm.
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record
and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We have considered
Cade’s issues raised in the supplemental brief and find them
without merit. We therefore affirm Cade’s convictions and sentence.
We require that counsel inform her 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 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. We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
2
materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED
3