UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-4143
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JOHN ZIEGLER,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Spartanburg. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District
Judge. (7:05-cr-0084-gra)
Submitted: July 20, 2006 Decided: July 24, 2006
Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James Barlow Loggins, Assistant Federal Public Defender,
Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellant. Maxwell Barnes Cauthen,
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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
John Ziegler pled guilty to one count of possession of
child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 2252A(a)(5)(B)
(West 2000 & Supp. 2006). The district court sentenced Ziegler to
forty-six months of imprisonment, the bottom of the applicable
advisory Guideline range. On appeal, counsel filed an Anders*
brief, in which he states there are no meritorious issues for
appeal, but suggests that the district court failed to comply with
the requirements of Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 in the guilty plea hearing.
Ziegler was advised of his right to file a pro se supplemental
brief, but has not filed a brief. We affirm.
Because Ziegler did not move in the district court to
withdraw his guilty plea, his challenge to the adequacy of the Rule
11 hearing is reviewed for plain error. See United States v.
Martinez, 277 F.3d 517, 525 (4th Cir. 2002). Our review of the
plea hearing transcript reveals that the district court conducted
a thorough Rule 11 colloquy that assured Ziegler’s plea was made
both knowingly and voluntarily. See United States v. DeFusco, 949
F.2d 114, 117, 120 (4th Cir. 1991). Accordingly, we find Ziegler’s
guilty plea was knowing and voluntary and properly accepted by the
district court.
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire
record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for
*
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).
- 2 -
appeal. We therefore affirm Ziegler’s conviction and sentence.
This court requires that counsel inform Ziegler, in writing, of the
right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for
further review. If Ziegler 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 Ziegler.
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 -