
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Benjamin PARKER, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 03-4026.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted June 30, 2003.
    Decided July 9, 2003.
    Langdon D. Long, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. William Kenneth Witherspoon, Office of the United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Benjamin Parker appeals the district court’s order resentencing him, upon remand from this court, to sixty months imprisonment for his conviction following a guilty plea to distribution of cocaine and cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B) (2000). In his appeal, filed pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Parker’s counsel raises as an issue the calculation of Parker’s sentence. Parker was advised of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief but has not done so. Finding no error, we affirm.

Parker pled guilty to distribution of between five and fifty grams of cocaine and cocaine base. Accordingly, he was subject to a statutory mandatory minimum sentence of five years regardless of any recommendation of the sentencing guidelines. See § 841(b)(1)(B). Because the sentence imposed by the district court was the minimum sentence allowed by law, we find no error.

We have reviewed the record in accordance with Anders and find no meritorious issues. Accordingly, 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.  