UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-4944
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JADRAIN BRANDON SMALL, a/k/a Jadrain Brandon
Smalls, a/k/a Lil J,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. Patrick Michael Duffy, District
Judge. (CR-05-141)
Submitted: March 30, 2006 Decided: April 5, 2006
Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
J. Robert Haley, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Charleston,
South Carolina, for Appellant. John C. Duane, Assistant United
States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Jadrain B. Small appeals from his 180-month sentence
imposed following his guilty plea to possession with intent to
distribute cocaine base and using or carrying a firearm during and
in relation to a drug trafficking offense. 21 U.S.C.A.
§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C) (West 2000 & Supp. 2005); 18 U.S.C.A.
§ 924(c)(1)(a) (West 2000 & Supp. 2005). Small’s counsel filed a
brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967),
stating that there were no meritorious issues for appeal, but
addressing the validity of Small’s plea. Small filed a pro se
supplemental brief challenging his sentence. Because our review of
the record discloses no reversible error, we affirm.
We find that Small’s guilty plea was knowingly and
voluntarily entered after a thorough hearing pursuant to Fed. R.
Crim. P. 11. Small was properly advised of his rights, the
offenses charged, the maximum sentence for each offense, and the
statutory minimum sentence for each offense. The court also
determined that there was an independent factual basis for the plea
and that the plea was not coerced or influenced by any promises.
See North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 31 (1970); United
States v. DeFusco, 949 F.2d 114, 119-20 (4th Cir. 1991).
Small contends that the district court erred in
sentencing him to the minimum term expressed in the statute of
conviction, rather than the much-lower sentence determined under
- 2 -
the Sentencing Guidelines. Because the statutes set the mandatory
minimum sentences applicable to Small’s offenses, and the district
court properly sentenced Small within the statutory range, we
affirm his sentence.
As required by Anders, we have reviewed the entire record
and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore
affirm Small’s convictions 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 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 -