IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-10543
(Summary Calendar)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
TOMMY HOWARD STRICKLIN,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
(7:93-CR-012-Y-1)
February 26, 1996
Before JOLLY, JONES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Tommy Howard Stricklin appeals his convictions and sentence for possession with intent to
manufacture a compound and mixture containing phenylacetone and possession of a listed chemical,
phenylacetic acid, with intent to manufacture methamphetamine. Stricklin contends that the district
court reversibly erred in calculating the drug quantity used to establish his base offense level, in
refusing to provide the jury with an “intent” instruction that he requested, and in denying his motion
to suppress evidence seized during the search of his property. Stricklin also contends that he received
ineffective assistance of counsel because his attorney had a conflict of interest.
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published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 Local Rule 47.5.4.
We have reviewed the record and the briefs and perceive no reversible error. The record is
not sufficiently developed to properly evaluate Stricklin’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.
Accordingly, we affirm Stricklin’s convictions and sentence without prejudice to Stricklin’s right to
assert his ineffective assistance of counsel claims in a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 proceeding.
2