United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Armando Despaingne, Defendant-appellant, 993 F.2d 229 (4th Cir. 1993)

OPINION

Armando Despaingne appeals from the judgment entered by the district court following a jury verdict of guilty on charges of armed bank robbery, 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a), (d) (1988 & Supp. II 1990). Counsel has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), raising an issue concerning the sufficiency of the evidence, but concluding that the appeal is without merit. Despaingne was notified of his right to a file a supplemental brief raising any additional issues he wished considered, but he has failed to do so. We affirm.

Despaingne was positively identified by a teller at trial. In addition, the Government introduced a confession signed by Despaingne. Though Despaingne took the stand in his own defense, the jury obviously did not find his testimony credible. The jury's credibility determination is unreviewable on appeal. United States v. Saunders, 886 F.2d 56, 60 (4th Cir. 1989). There was sufficient evidence to support the conviction. See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979).

As required by Anders, we have independently reviewed the entire record and all pertinent documents. We have considered all potentially meritorious issues presented by this record and conclude that there are no nonfrivolous grounds for appeal.^*  Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

Pursuant to the plan adopted by the Fourth Circuit Judicial Council in implementation of the Criminal Justice Act of 1964 (18 U.S.C. § 3006A (1988)), this Court requires that counsel inform his client, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court for further review. If requested by his client to do so, counsel should prepare a timely petition for a writ of certiorari.

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