The opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-4562
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JOHN NASSHON BROWN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (CR-02-125)
Submitted: May 27, 2004 Decided: June 2, 2004
Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam
opinion.
Edwin L. West, III, EDWIN L. WEST, III, P.L.L.C., Wilmington, North
Carolina, for Appellant. Anne Margaret Hayes, Assistant United
States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
John Nasshon Brown pled guilty to bank robbery and aiding
and abetting, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2113, 2 (2000), and was sentenced to 94
months imprisonment. On appeal, his counsel has filed a brief in
accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), alleging
that there are no meritorious claims for appeal, but addressing
whether the district court should have departed based on diminished
mental capacity. See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual, § 5K2.13
(2002). Although informed of the right to do so, Brown has not
filed a pro se supplemental brief.
Because the court correctly understood its authority to
depart in this case, we lack jurisdiction to review its decision
not to depart under § 5K2.13. See United States v. Carr, 303 F.3d
539, 545 (4th Cir. 2002), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1138 (2003);
United States v. Bayerle, 898 F.2d 28, 31 (4th Cir. 1990).
Accordingly, we dismiss this portion of the appeal.
We have examined the entire record in this case in
accordance with the requirements of Anders and find no meritorious
issues for appeal. Therefore, we affirm Brown’s conviction and
sentence. 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 a petition
be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be
frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to
- 2 -
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 IN PART, DISMISSED IN PART
- 3 -