UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.                                                                         No. 98-4643

RUFUS HENRY NICHOLS,
Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham.
William L. Osteen, District Judge.
(CR-97-273)

Submitted: May 28, 1999

Decided: July 12, 1999

Before ERVIN, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Louis C. Allen, III, Federal Public Defender, Gregory Davis, Assis-
tant Federal Public Defender, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appel-
lant. Walter C. Holton, Jr., United States Attorney, Sandra J. Hairston,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
Appellee.

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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Rufus Henry Nichols appeals from his conviction and sentence for
possession of crack cocaine with the intent to distribute in violation
of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (1994). Citing United States v. Anders, 

(1967), Nichols' attorney has filed a brief certifying that
there are no meritorious issues for appeal, but presenting as a possible
issue the inclusion in Nichols' criminal history score of a state court
conviction, pursuant to a guilty plea, for which Nichols received a
prayer of judgment continued. Nichols has filed a pro se supplemental
brief arguing this issue and asserting that he should receive credit for
time served in state custody for conduct related to the instant offense.
We affirm.

Our review of the record and relevant law leads us to conclude that
the contested state conviction was properly counted in calculating
Nichols' criminal history score. See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines
Manual §§ 4A1.2(a)(3), 4A1.2(a)(4), 4A.12(f) (1997). Additionally,
although 18 U.S.C.A. § 3585(b) (1994), provides that "[a] defendant
shall be given credit toward the service of a term of imprisonment for
any time he has spent in official detention prior to the date the sen-
tence commences," this section "does not authorize a district court to
compute the credit at sentencing." United States v. Wilson, 

, 334 (1992). Rather, it is the Attorney General, through the
Bureau of Prisons, who must compute and award such credit. See 

to Anders, this court has reviewed the record for potential
error and has found none. We therefore affirm Nichols' sentence and
conviction. This court requires that counsel inform his client, in writ-
ing, 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 coun-
sel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may

                     2
move this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel's
motion must state that a copy thereof was served on the client. We
deny counsel's pending motion to withdraw, deny Nichols' motion
for appointment of alternative counsel, and dispense with oral argu-
ment because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the deci-
sional process.

AFFIRMED

                    3