US v. David McCleod
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DAVID MCCLEOD, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. (4:03-cr-843-TLW)
Submitted: May 22, 2008
May 27, 2008
Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael A. Meetze, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellant. Arthur Bradley Parham, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: David McCleod appeals the district court's order revoking his supervised release and sentencing him to ten months'
McCleod's attorney has filed a brief pursuant to
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that there are no meritorious issues for appeal, but suggesting that the district court erred in ordering revocation and sentencing McCleod based on supervised release violations. McCleod has been informed of his
right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but has not done so. Pursuant to Anders, we have examined the entire record and find no meritorious issues for appeal. McCleod admitted to
violations of his supervised release, and his sentence, which was within the advisory guidelines range, was reasonable. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's judgment. This court requires that
counsel inform his client, in writing of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If the
client requests that such 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 We
motion must state that a copy thereof was served on the client.
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 - 2 -
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?