United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT December 16, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 04-20271
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
KRISTOPHER BROCK,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:02-CR-364-1
--------------------
Before KING, Chief Judge, and DeMOSS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Kristopher Brock appeals his conviction and sentence
following a jury trial for possession with intent to distribute
five grams or more of cocaine base. 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1),
(b)(1)(B)(iii). He argues that 1) his trial counsel rendered
ineffective assistance in failing to object at trial to testimony
regarding his criminal history, 2) his trial counsel rendered
ineffective assistance in failing to object at trial to the
admissibility of a tape recording and to a witness’s trial
testimony regarding the contents of that tape recording, and
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
No. 04-20271
-2-
3) the cumulative effect of his trial counsel’s errors deprived
him of a fair trial.
“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); see
Massaro v. United States, 538 U.S. 500, 504-05 (2003). This is
not one of those rare cases. The judgment of the district court
is AFFIRMED.