UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.                                                                    No. 99-4312

BOBBY FORRESTER SPOONE, JR.,
Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville.
G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge.
(CR-98-178)

Submitted: October 5, 1999

Decided: October 20, 1999

Before MURNAGHAN, HAMILTON, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Benjamin T. Stepp, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greenville,
South Carolina, for Appellant. David Calhoun Stephens, Assistant
United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________
OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Bobby Forrester Spoone, Jr., pled guilty to one count of possession
of a firearm by a convicted felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)
(1994). The district court sentenced Spoone to imprisonment for 188
months. We vacated and remanded based on an inconsistency
between Spoone's base offense level and his criminal history cate-
gory. On remand, the district court adjusted Spoone's criminal history
category to level V and resentenced him to 180 months imprisonment.

Following Spoone's notice of appeal, his counsel has filed a brief
in accordance with Anders v. California, 

 (1967). Coun-
sel states that there are no meritorious grounds for appeal, but raises
the following issue: whether the district court erred in sentencing
Spoone to 180 months imprisonment. The United States declined to
file a brief, stating that it agreed with the conclusion that no meritori-
ous issues existed for appeal. Spoone filed a supplemental brief in
which he challenged the underlying facts of his conviction.

This court has previously noted that Spoone is precluded from
challenging his conviction by the terms of his plea agreement. See
United States v. Spoone, No. 98-4570, slip op. at 3 (4th Cir. Feb. 5,
1999) (unpublished). Furthermore, the district court's modification of
Spoone's criminal history category to level V brings Spoone's sen-
tence into full compliance with U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual,
§ 4B1.4 (1997), and 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1994).

We have also examined the entire record in this case in accordance
with the requirements of Anders, and find no meritorious issues for
appeal. This court requires that counsel inform his client, in writing,
of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for fur-
ther 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 withdraw from representation. Coun-
sel's motion must state that a copy thereof was served on the client.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten-
tions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

                     2