United States of America v. Willie Louis Rosederie Smith, a/k/a WL

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-4365
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
WILLIE LOUIS ROSEDERIE SMITH, a/k/a WL,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (3:13-cr-01017-JFA-5)
Submitted: February 25, 2016 Decided: April 8, 2016
Before MOTZ, WYNN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mario A. Pacella, STROM LAW FIRM, L.L.C., Columbia, South
Carolina, for Appellant. Nancy Chastain Wicker, OFFICE OF THE
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 3 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Willie Louis Rosederie Smith pled guilty pursuant to a plea
agreement to conspiracy to possess and distribute 500 grams of
cocaine, 28 grams of crack, and 50-100 kilograms of marijuana.
On appeal, counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting there are no
meritorious grounds for appeal, but asking whether the district
court erred by denying Smith’s motion to withdraw his guilty
plea. We affirm.
We find no abuse of discretion by the district court in
denying Smith’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea. See United
States v. Ubakanma, 215 F.3d 421, 424 (4th Cir. 2000) (providing
review standard). The district court held a hearing and
properly analyzed Smith’s motion under United States v. Moore,
931 F.2d 245, 248 (4th Cir. 1991). We find no reversible error
in this regard.
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record in
this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. This
review includes the issues raised in Smith’s pro se supplemental
brief. We therefore affirm Smith’s conviction and sentence.
This court requires that counsel inform Smith, in writing, of
the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for
further review. If Smith requests that a petition be filed, but
counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then

-- 2 of 3 --

3
counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from
representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof
was served on Smith.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

-- 3 of 3 --