US v. Jermal Clemon

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:09-cr-00788-HFF-1. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998526816] [10-4402]

Case: 10-4402

Document: 27

Date Filed: 02/17/2011

Page: 1

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-4402

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JERMAL OLLIE CLEMONS,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson.
Henry F. Floyd, District Judge.
(8:09-cr-00788-HFF-1)

Submitted:

February 10, 2011

Decided:

February 17, 2011

Before WILKINSON and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Wesley Locklair, III, LOCKLAIR & LOCKLAIR, PC, Columbia,
South Carolina, for Appellant. Elizabeth Jean Howard, Assistant
United
States
Attorney,
Greenville,
South
Carolina,
for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Case: 10-4402

Document: 27

Date Filed: 02/17/2011

Page: 2

PER CURIAM:
Jermal
possess

with

base.

Ollie

intent

Clemons

to

pled

distribute

guilty
and

to

to

conspiracy

distribute

to

cocaine

The district court sentenced Clemons to 186 months in

prison.

On appeal, Clemons’ counsel has filed an Anders * brief,

stating

that

there

are

no

viable

trial

grounds

counsel

for

appeal,

questioning

whether

assistance.

Although informed of his right to do so, Clemons

has not filed a supplemental brief.

rendered

but

ineffective

We affirm.

Clemons asserts that his attorney was ineffective for
incorrectly predicting the applicable Guidelines range prior to
Clemons’ guilty plea.

However, ineffective assistance claims

are more appropriately raised in a motion filed pursuant to 28
U.S.C.A.

§

2255

(West

Supp.

2010),

unless

ineffectiveness conclusively appears on the record.

counsel’s
See United

States v. Richardson, 195 F.3d 192, 198 (4th Cir. 1999).
review

of

counsel

the

record,

rendered

we

find

ineffective

no

conclusive

assistance,

After

evidence

and

we

that

accordingly

decline to consider these claims on direct appeal.
In
remainder

of

accordance
the

with

record

in

Anders,
this

meritorious issues for review.
*

we

case

have
and

reviewed
have

found

the
no

We therefore affirm Clemons’

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).

2

Case: 10-4402

conviction

and

Document: 27

sentence.

Date Filed: 02/17/2011

This

court

requires

Page: 3

that

counsel

inform Clemons, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme
Court

of

the

United

States

for

further

review.

If

Clemons

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 representation.

Counsel’s

motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Clemons.
dispense

with

oral

argument

because

the

facts

and

We

legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

3