IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-20921
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RAFAEL DOMINGUEZ, JR.,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
For the Southern District of Texas
(H-98-CR-126-2)
September 26, 2000
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Rafael Dominguez, Jr., appeals his conviction by guilty plea
for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute a controlled
substance. He argues that the government failed to establish the
factual basis for his plea and that he received ineffective
assistance of counsel. After reviewing the briefs and the record,
we find no grounds for reversal.
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
Dominguez pleaded guilty to violating 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 and
846. He argues that since the government conceded that he did not
know that there was cocaine included in the shipment of marijuana
he made, there is no factual basis for his guilty plea to the
charge that he conspired to possess with intent to distribute both
marijuana and cocaine. Section 841, which defines the offense
underlying the conspiracy, requires only knowing possession with
intent to distribute a controlled substance. Dominguez’s knowledge
that the shipment contained marijuana provided a factual basis for
his guilty plea. Whether or not he was aware of the cocaine in the
shipment does not bear on his guilt under Sections 841 and 846; the
references to cocaine in Section 841 appear only in its sentencing
provisions.
This court generally declines to review claims of ineffective
assistance of counsel on direct appeal. United States v. Gibson, 55
F.3d 173, 179 (5th Cir. 1995). We have “undertaken to resolve
claims of inadequate representation on direct appeal only in rare
cases where the record allowed us to evaluate fairly the merits of
the claim.” United States v. Higdon, 832 F.2d 312, 314 (5th Cir.
1987). This is not such a case.
For these reasons, Dominguez’s conviction and sentence are
AFFFIRMED.
2