UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-4822
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
RODNEY TYRONE RAMEY,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenwood. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge.
(CR-03-433)
Submitted: February 27, 2004 Decided: March 29, 2004
Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Benjamin T. Stepp, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greenville,
South Carolina, for Appellant. James Strom Thurmond, Jr., United
States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, Elizabeth Jean Howard,
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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Rodney Tyrone Ramey pled guilty to one count of
possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, 18 U.S.C.
§§ 922(g)(1), 924(a) (2000). The district court sentenced him to
120 months in prison. Ramey timely appealed.
Ramey’s counsel has filed a brief in accordance with
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that, in his
view, there are no meritorious grounds for appeal. However, he
raises the issue of whether the district court complied with Rule
11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure in accepting Ramey’s
guilty plea. After reviewing the transcript of the plea
proceeding, we conclude that the district court fully complied with
the requirements of Rule 11 in accepting Ramey’s guilty plea.
Ramey has filed a pro se supplemental brief. We have
considered his claims and find them to be without merit.
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire
record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for
appeal. We therefore affirm Ramey’s conviction and sentence. 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
- 2 -
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 materials before
the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
- 3 -