United States v. Coker , 234 F. App'x 149 ( 2007 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-5255
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
BURTON ARNOLD COKER,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Bryson City. Lacy H. Thornburg,
District Judge. (2:01-cr-00037)
Submitted: July 13, 2007 Decided: July 25, 2007
Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Janna D. Allison, Waynesville, North Carolina, for Appellant.
Gretchen C. F. Shappert, United States Attorney, Charlotte, North
Carolina, Amy Elizabeth Ray, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY,
Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Burton Arnold Coker appeals the district court’s order
revoking his supervised release and sentencing him to eight months’
imprisonment. Coker’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 by revoking and sentencing Coker based on supervised
release violations. Coker 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. Coker admitted to
violations of his supervised release, and we find his sentence was
reasonable. 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 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 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
- 2 -