The opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-5197
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
MIKE ANTHONY BROWN, a/k/a Michael Anthony
Brown,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg,
District Judge. (CR-04-93)
Submitted: August 31, 2006 Decided: September 5, 2006
Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Claire J. Rauscher, FEDERAL DEFENDERS OF WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA,
INC., Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Gretchen C.F.
Shappert, United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, Amy E.
Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Mike Anthony Brown pled guilty to conspiracy to possess
with intent to distribute at least fifty grams of a mixture or
substance containing a detectable amount of cocaine base, in
violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841, 846 (2000). The district court
sentenced Brown to 210 months’ imprisonment, five years of
supervised release, and ordered payment of a $100 statutory
assessment. Brown has appealed, challenging the district court’s
denial of his motion for new counsel. We find no abuse of the
district court’s discretion. See United States v. Gallop, 838 F.2d
105, 108 (4th Cir. 1988). The district court conducted an adequate
inquiry into Brown’s complaint and properly determined that: (1)
counsel was diligent in his efforts to represent Brown; (2) Brown’s
motion for substitute counsel was not timely filed; (3) there was
not a total lack of communication between Brown and his attorney;
(4) Brown’s own behavior created the conflict that was present; and
(5) Brown put forth no valid reason why new counsel should be
appointed. Id.
Accordingly, we affirm Brown’s conviction and sentence.
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 -