UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-5892
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
SHANNON DEVONNE DALTON PITTMAN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Winston-Salem. William L. Osteen,
Sr., District Judge. (CR-94-290)
Submitted: July 25, 1996 Decided: August 14, 1996
Before LUTTIG and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Lawrence J. Fine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellant.
Walter C. Holton, Jr., United States Attorney, David B. Smith,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Shannon Devonne Dalton Pittman pled guilty to conspiracy to
possess crack cocaine with intent to distribute, 21 U.S.C.A. § 846
(West Supp. 1996), and received the mandatory minimum sentence of
ten years. Her attorney has filed a brief in accordance with Anders
v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), raising one issue but indi-
cating that in his view there are no meritorious issues for appeal.
Pittman was notified of her right to file a pro se supplemental
brief but has failed to do so.
Pittman's counsel challenges as unconstitutionally vague the
enhanced penalties for crack offenses prescribed by 21 U.S.C.A.
§ 841 (West 1981 & Supp. 1996), an argument we considered and
rejected in United States v. Fisher, 58 F.3d 96, 98-99 (4th Cir.),
cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 64 U.S.L.W. 3270 (U.S. Oct. 10, 1995)
(No. 95-5923).
In accordance with Anders, we have examined the entire record
in this case and find no meritorious issues for appeal. We there-
fore affirm Pittman's conviction and sentence. We deny counsel's
motion to withdraw at this time. This court requires that counsel
inform his client, in writing, of her right to petition the Supreme
Court of the United States for further review. If the client re-
quests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a
petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move again in this
court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel's motion
must state that a copy thereof was served on the client.
2
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the record and briefs, and
oral argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
3