UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-4460
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
ALEJANDRO HERNANDEZ-SALAS, a/k/a Adolfo Perez,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Bryson City. Lacy H. Thornburg,
District Judge. (CR-03-101)
Submitted: February 28, 2007 Decided: March 15, 2007
Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William L. Davis, III, Lumberton, North Carolina, for Appellant.
Thomas Richard Ascik, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY,
Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Alejandro Hernandez-Salas entered a guilty plea, pursuant
to a plea agreement, to conspiracy to possess with intent to
distribute methamphetamine and cocaine base, 21 U.S.C.
§§ 841(a)(1), 846 (2000). He received a sentence of thirty-seven
months’ imprisonment.
Hernandez-Salas’ counsel has filed a brief in accordance
with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that he has
concluded there are no meritorious issues for appeal, but
addressing the voluntariness of Hernandez-Salas’ guilty plea and
propriety of his sentence. Hernandez-Salas was notified of his
right to file a pro se informal brief; however, he did not file
such a brief. In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the
entire record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for
appeal.
Therefore, we affirm Hernandez-Salas’ conviction and
sentence. This court requires that counsel inform Hernandez-Salas,
in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the
United States for further review. If Hernandez-Salas 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 Hernandez-Salas. 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 -