US v. John McLaurin

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:12-cr-00348-JKB-4 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999610705].. [14-4887]

Appeal: 14-4887

Doc: 34

Filed: 06/29/2015

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-4887

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JOHN MCLAURIN,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. James K. Bredar, District Judge. (1:12cr-00348-JKB-4)

Submitted:

June 25, 2015

Decided:

June 29, 2015

Before GREGORY, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ron Earnest, Riverdale, Maryland, for Appellant.
Clinton Jacob
Fuchs, John Francis Purcell, Jr., Assistant United States
Attorneys, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-4887

Doc: 34

Filed: 06/29/2015

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
John McLaurin pleaded guilty, pursuant to a written plea
agreement, to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute five
kilograms

or

more

of

cocaine,

in

§§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A), 846 (2012).

violation

of

21

U.S.C.

The district court sentenced

him to 120 months’ imprisonment, the statutory mandatory minimum.
On appeal, McLaurin’s counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders
v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that there are no
meritorious issues for appeal but questioning the substantive
reasonableness of the sentence. McLaurin has filed a pro se brief,
asserting that the district court lacked jurisdiction, that his
arrest was unlawful, and that his counsel was ineffective. ∗
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record in
this case, and have found no meritorious issues.

Before accepting

McLaurin’s guilty plea, the district court conducted a thorough
plea colloquy, substantially satisfying the requirements of Fed.

∗

We have considered the first two issues and find them
meritless. As to McLaurin’s claim that counsel was ineffective,
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 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 these claims should be raised, if at
all, in a § 2255 motion.
2

Appeal: 14-4887

Doc: 34

Filed: 06/29/2015

Pg: 3 of 3

R. Crim. P. 11 and ensuring that McLaurin’s plea was knowing,
voluntary, and supported by an independent factual basis.

See

United States v. DeFusco, 949 F.2d 114, 116 (4th Cir. 1991).

The

district court made no significant procedural error at sentencing,
see Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007), and
does

not

Guidelines

rebut

our

sentence

appellate
is

presumption

substantively

that

reasonable.

McLaurin

his

within-

See

United

States v. Louthian, 756 F.3d 295, 306 (4th Cir.), cert. denied,
135 S. Ct. 421 (2014).
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment.

This

court requires that counsel inform McLaurin, in writing, of the
right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for
further review.

If McLaurin requests that a petition be filed,

but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then
counsel

may

move

representation.

in

this

court

for

leave

to

withdraw

from

Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof

was served on McLaurin.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the material before this
court and argument will not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

3