UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-4240
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
CLIFTON EARL WAGNER SMITH,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg,
District Judge. (1:07-cr-00032-LHT-5)
Submitted: March 23, 2009 Decided: April 2, 2009
Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Deborrah L. Newton, NEWTON LAW, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellant. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney,
Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Pursuant to a plea agreement, Clifton Earl Wagner
Smith pled guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to
distribute fifty grams or more of cocaine base (“crack”), in
violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 846 (2006). The district
court sentenced Smith to 210 months in prison. Smith timely
appealed.
Smith’s counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders
v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that, in her view,
there are no meritorious grounds for appeal. Counsel questions
whether the sentence imposed was inconsistent with the plea
agreement and whether the plea agreement was improperly one-
sided in favor of the Government. Smith was advised of his
right to file a pro se supplemental brief but he did not file
one.
Our thorough review of the record, including the plea
agreement and the sentence hearing transcript, convinces us that
Smith’s claims are meritless. In accordance with Anders, we
have reviewed the entire record for any meritorious issues and
have found none. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s
judgment.
This court requires 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
2
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