US v. Bouchard
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ROGER TODD BOUCHARD, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (1:05-cr-00224)
May 4, 2007
May 31, 2007
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Leslie Carter Rawls, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Gretchen C. F. Shappert, United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, Corey F. Ellis, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Roger Todd Bouchard appeals his convictions and sentence following a guilty plea to possession of a firearm during and in relation to a drug trafficking crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1) (2000), and possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (2000). Bouchard's California, attorney 386 has filed a brief pursuant that to Anders are v. no
meritorious issues for appeal but raising as potential issues whether the district court complied with Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 and whether trial counsel was ineffective. supplemental brief. Bouchard filed a pro se
Finding no reversible error, we affirm.
First, counsel raises the issue of whether the district court fully complied with Rule 11, but identifies no error in the Rule 11 proceeding. After a thorough review of the record, we find
the district court fully complied with the requirements of Rule 11. Both Bouchard and his present counsel question whether trial counsel provided ineffective assistance. Because the record
does not conclusively establish ineffective assistance of counsel, we find the claim is not cognizable on direct appeal. See United
States v. DeFusco, 949 F.2d 114, 120-21 (4th Cir. 1991) (holding that claims of ineffective assistance of counsel must be brought in a collateral proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000), unless it
- 2 -
conclusively appears from the face of the record that counsel was ineffective). In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore affirm Bouchard's convictions and sentence.
This court requires that counsel inform her client, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If the client 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
Counsel's motion must state that a copy thereof We dispense with oral argument because
was served on the client.
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process. AFFIRMED
- 3 -
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?