UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-4426
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
CORY DESHAWN LINDSAY,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney,
District Judge. (3:08-cr-00216-FDW-1)
Submitted: December 17, 2010 Decided: January 13, 2011
Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Susan S. Kister, St. Louis, Missouri, for Appellant. Amy
Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville,
North Carolina, Mark A. Jones, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Cory Deshawn Lindsay pled guilty pursuant to a plea
agreement to possession with intent to distribute cocaine base
“crack” (Count 1) and possession of a firearm by a convicted
felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) (2006) (Count 2). He
was sentenced to 240 months of imprisonment on the drug charge
and 120 months concurrently for the firearm violation. On
appeal, counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting there are no
meritorious grounds for appeal, but raising the following issue:
whether Lindsay received ineffective assistance of trial
counsel.
Lindsay has failed to establish the demanding grounds
needed to raise ineffective assistance of counsel at this
juncture. Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are not
cognizable on direct appeal unless the record conclusively
establishes ineffective assistance. United States v.
Richardson, 195 F.3d 192, 198 (4th Cir. 1999). Rather, to allow
for adequate development of the record, claims of ineffective
assistance generally should be brought in a 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255
(West Supp. 2010) motion. United States v. Gastiaburo, 16 F.3d
582, 590 (4th Cir. 1994).
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record
in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal.
2
We therefore affirm Lindsay’s convictions and sentence. This
court requires that counsel inform Lindsay, in writing, of the
right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for
further review. If Lindsay 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 Lindsay.
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