US v. Fred Carrasco, Jr.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:13-cr-00199-RJC-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999680396].. [15-4219]

Appeal: 15-4219

Doc: 25

Filed: 10/19/2015

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-4219

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
FRED CARRASCO, JR., a/k/a Aaron Bryant,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.
Robert J. Conrad,
Jr., District Judge. (3:13-cr-00199-RJC-1)

Submitted:

October 15, 2015

Decided:

October 19, 2015

Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Carol Ann Bauer, Morganton, North Carolina, for Appellant. Jill
Westmoreland Rose, Acting United States Attorney, Amy E. Ray,
Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-4219

Doc: 25

Filed: 10/19/2015

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Fred Carrasco, Jr., appeals his convictions and sentence
imposed following his guilty pleas, pursuant to a written plea
agreement, to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent
to distribute at least 1000 kilograms of marijuana and at least
500 grams of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (2012),
and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking
crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) (2012).

We dismiss

the appeal.
Carrasco

argues

on

appeal

that

his

counsel

provided

ineffective assistance by improperly advising him prior to his
guilty plea.

To establish ineffective assistance of counsel in

the context of a guilty plea, “the defendant must show that
counsel’s

representation

reasonableness,”

fell

Strickland

below

v.

an

objective

Washington,

466

standard

U.S.

668,

of
688

(1984), and “that there is a reasonable probability that, but
for counsel’s errors, he would not have pleaded guilty and would
have insisted on going to trial,” Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52,
59 (1985).

Unless an attorney’s ineffectiveness conclusively

appears on the face of the record, ineffective assistance claims
are not generally addressed on direct appeal.
Benton, 523 F.3d 424, 435 (4th Cir. 2008).
should

be

raised

in

a

motion

brought

United States v.

Instead, such claims

pursuant

to

28

U.S.C.

§ 2255 (2012), in order to permit sufficient development of the
2

Appeal: 15-4219

Doc: 25

record.

Filed: 10/19/2015

Pg: 3 of 3

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 Carrasco’s
ineffective assistance claim should be raised, if at all, in a
§ 2255
dispense

motion.
with

contentions

are

Accordingly,
oral

argument

adequately

we

dismiss

because

presented

in

this

the
the

appeal.

facts

We

and

legal

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

3