UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-4863
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
GARLAND ELLISON,
Defendant – Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at New Bern. James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (4:08-cr-00062-F-1)
Submitted: September 30, 2010 Decided: November 4, 2010
Before KING, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ronald Cohen, Wilmington, North Carolina, for Appellant. George
E. B. Holding, United States Attorney, Anne M. Hayes, Jennifer
P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Garland Ellison was convicted of mailing threatening
communications, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 876(c) (2006). He
now appeals, contending that defense counsel was ineffective.
We affirm.
To allow for adequate development of the record, a
defendant ordinarily must raise a claim of ineffective
assistance of counsel in a 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2010)
motion unless it conclusively appears on the face of the record
that counsel provided inadequate assistance. United States v.
Richardson, 195 F.3d 192, 198 (4th Cir. 1999). Our review of
the record, including a forensic report and transcripts of the
competency hearing and jury trial, reveals that ineffective
assistance does not conclusively appear on the face of the
record. We therefore affirm. 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
2