US v. Jermaine Ro

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:13-cr-00263-RJC-14 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000028037]. Mailed to: Jermaine Ross. [16-7507]

Appeal: 16-7507

Doc: 7

Filed: 02/22/2017

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7507

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
JERMAINE ANTONIO ROSS, a/k/a Rock,
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-00263-RJC-14)

Submitted:

February 16, 2017

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge,
HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Decided:

DUNCAN,

February 22, 2017

Circuit

Judge,

and

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jermaine Antonio Ross, Appellant Pro Se. William Michael Miller,
Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina;
Paul Bradford Taylor, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY,
Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-7507

Doc: 7

Filed: 02/22/2017

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Jermaine
order

Antonio

denying

his

Ross

request

sentencing

transcripts.

transcript

is

assistance

of

counsel

for
Ross

necessary

(2012) motion.

appeals

to

in

a

from

free

the

copies

contends

support

a

district
of

that

his

claim

yet-to-be-filed

his

of

28

court’s

plea

and

sentencing
ineffective

U.S.C.

§

2255

Because Ross has no pending § 2255 motion, and

he may adequately raise his ineffective assistance of counsel
claim

in

a

§

2255

motion

without

the

preparation

transcripts, we affirm the district court’s judgment.

of

the

If Ross

files a § 2255 motion, the district court may then consider
whether an answer is required and whether transcript preparation
or some other form of discovery is necessary to decide Ross’
claim.

See Rule 4(b), Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings

(requiring

court

to

examine

§

2255

motion

and

determine

if

answer is required); Rule 5(c) (providing that court may order
government to furnish transcripts); Rule 6(a) (allowing district
court to authorize discovery for good cause).

We dispense with

oral

contentions

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

and

materials

legal
before

this

court

are
and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

2