UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-4960
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
CHARLAYNE ANNETTE CRAWFORD,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Richard L. Voorhees,
District Judge. (1:08-cr-00110-RLV-DSC-1)
Submitted: May 26, 2011 Decided: June 10, 2011
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Steven T. Meier, MEIER LAW, Charlotte, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Charlayne Annette Crawford pleaded guilty, pursuant to
a plea agreement, to one count of making a false statement to
the Federal Bureau of Investigation in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 1001 (2006). The district court sentenced Crawford to six
months’ probation and imposed a $100 special assessment. We
affirm.
On appeal, Crawford’s counsel filed a brief pursuant
to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), in which he states
that he could find no meritorious issues for appeal. Crawford
was informed of her right to file a pro se supplemental brief,
but she has not done so. Counsel calls our attention to
Crawford’s allegations of duress and coercion set forth in her
notice of appeal filed in the district court. We find no merit
in these conclusory allegations, especially in light of
Crawford’s sworn testimony to the contrary.
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record
in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal.
We therefore affirm Crawford’s conviction and sentence. This
court requires that counsel inform Crawford, in writing, of the
right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for
further review. If Crawford 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 Crawford.
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