US v. Charlayne Crawford, No. 10-4960 (4th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: <
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-4960 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CHARLAYNE ANNETTE CRAWFORD, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (1:08-cr-00110-RLV-DSC-1) Submitted: May 26, 2011 Decided: June 10, 2011 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Steven T. Meier, MEIER LAW, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Charlayne Annette Crawford pleaded guilty, pursuant to a plea agreement, to one count of making a false statement to the Federal Bureau of Investigation in violation of 18 U.S.C. ยง 1001 (2006). The district court sentenced Crawford to six months probation and imposed a $100 special assessment. We affirm. On appeal, Crawford s counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), in which he states that he could find no meritorious issues for appeal. Crawford was informed of her right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but she has not done so. Counsel calls our attention to Crawford s allegations of duress and coercion set forth in her notice of appeal filed in the district court. in these conclusory allegations, We find no merit especially in light of Crawford s sworn testimony to the contrary. In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore affirm Crawford s conviction and sentence. This court requires that counsel inform Crawford, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Crawford 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 withdraw from 2 representation. Counsel s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Crawford. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal before contentions the court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials decisional process. AFFIRMED 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
