UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-4219
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
FRED CARRASCO, JR., a/k/a Aaron Bryant,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad,
Jr., District Judge. (3:13-cr-00199-RJC-1)
Submitted: October 15, 2015 Decided: October 19, 2015
Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Carol Ann Bauer, Morganton, North Carolina, for Appellant. Jill
Westmoreland Rose, Acting United States Attorney, Amy E. Ray,
Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Fred Carrasco, Jr., appeals his convictions and sentence
imposed following his guilty pleas, pursuant to a written plea
agreement, to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent
to distribute at least 1000 kilograms of marijuana and at least
500 grams of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (2012),
and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking
crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) (2012). We dismiss
the appeal.
Carrasco argues on appeal that his counsel provided
ineffective assistance by improperly advising him prior to his
guilty plea. To establish ineffective assistance of counsel in
the context of a guilty plea, “the defendant must show that
counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of
reasonableness,” Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688
(1984), and “that there is a reasonable probability that, but
for counsel’s errors, he would not have pleaded guilty and would
have insisted on going to trial,” Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52,
59 (1985). Unless an attorney’s ineffectiveness conclusively
appears on the face of the record, ineffective assistance claims
are not generally addressed on direct appeal. United States v.
Benton, 523 F.3d 424, 435 (4th Cir. 2008). Instead, such claims
should be raised in a motion brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 2255 (2012), in order to permit sufficient development of the
2
record. United States v. Baptiste, 596 F.3d 214, 216 n.1 (4th
Cir. 2010).
Because the record does not conclusively establish
ineffective assistance of counsel, we conclude that Carrasco’s
ineffective assistance claim should be raised, if at all, in a
§ 2255 motion. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
3