
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Truman CROWDER, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 04-4237.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: July 15, 2004.
    Decided: July 20, 2004.
    
      Louis C. Allen, III, Federal Public Defender, William C. Ingram, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant.
    Angela Hewlett Miller, Office of the United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM:

Truman Crowder appeals the district court’s order revoking his supervised release, sentencing him to twenty-four months’ imprisonment, and reimposing a thirty-six month term of supervised release. In his appeal, filed pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), counsel for Crowder claims there are no non-frivolous grounds for appeal. We have reviewed the record and conclude that Crowder’s sentence is within the statutory maximum sentencing range, and the district court’s revocation proceedings otherwise comport with due process. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583 (2000). Finding no meritorious issues, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

This court requires that counsel inform his client, in writing, 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 counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on the client. 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  