Case ID: f-appx_111/html/0192-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Charles Jeter GRIFFITH, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 04-4256.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 15, 2004.
    Decided Oct. 22, 2004.
    Leslie Carter Rawls, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Gretchen C.F. Shappert, United States Attorney, Thomas R. Ascik, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM.

Charles Jeter Griffith seeks to appeal his conviction and 135-month sentence imposed after a jury found him guilty of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841, 846 (2000). On appeal, Griffith claims that trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance. Finding no error, we affirm.

Ineffective assistance claims are not generally addressed on direct appeal unless it appears conclusively from the record that Appellant received ineffective assistance of counsel. United States v. Richardson, 195 F.3d 192, 198 (4th Cir. 1999). Such claims generally should be raised by motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). Id. We conclude Griffith has not shown conclusively from the face of the record that counsel provided ineffective representation. Accordingly, we affirm Griffith’s conviction without prejudice to his assertion of ineffective assistance of counsel claims in a § 2255 proceeding. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED