UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-5032
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
LARRY MORRISON,
Defendant – Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L.
Voorhees, District Judge. (5:06-cr-00044-RLV-CH-1)
Submitted: May 21, 2010 Decided: June 14, 2010
Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dennis Gibson, LAW OFFICE OF DENNIS GIBSON, Asheville, North
Carolina, for Appellant. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United
States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Larry Morrison pled guilty to conspiracy to possess
with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of
21 U.S.C. §§ 841(b)(1)(A) & 846 (2006). At sentencing, the
district court overruled Morrison’s objection to the presentence
report that he was an organizer or leader and, therefore, did
not qualify for the “safety valve” provision. See U.S.
Sentencing Guidelines Manual (USSG) (2007). The district court
also refused to impose a USSG § 5C1.2 sentence outside of
Morrison’s advisory guidelines range based on 18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(a)(6) (2006). The district court sentenced Morrison to
210 months’ imprisonment, and Morrison timely noted his appeal.
On appeal, Morrison’s counsel has filed a brief
pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Morrison
has also filed a pro se supplemental brief. In both his pro se
and Anders briefs, Morrison suggests his trial counsel’s
performance was constitutionally deficient. Claims of
ineffective assistance of counsel are not cognizable on direct
appeal unless the record conclusively establishes that counsel
provided ineffective assistance. United States v. Baldovinos,
434 F.3d 233, 239 (4th Cir. 2006). The record here does not
conclusively establish that trial counsel rendered ineffective
assistance. Accordingly, we decline on direct appeal to
entertain Morrison’s claim that his attorney did not provide
2
effective assistance. Additionally, we have reviewed the
transcript of Morrison’s Rule 11 hearing and determined that his
guilty plea was knowing and voluntary.
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record
in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal.
We therefore deny Morrison’s motions to withdraw or relieve
counsel and affirm Morrison’s conviction and sentence. This
court requires that counsel inform Morrison, in writing, of the
right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for
further review. If Morrison requests that a petition be filed,
but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous,
then counsel may move again in this court for leave to withdraw
from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy
thereof was served on Morrison.
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
3