Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca3-05-01377/USCOURTS-ca3-05-01377-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Carlos Aguirre
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

NOT PRECEDENTIAL

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT 

OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

 

NO. 05-1377

 

 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

CARLOS AGUIRRE

 Appellant

 

On Appeal From the United States 

District Court

For the District of New Jersey 

(D.C. Crim. Action No. 04-cr-00496)

District Judge: Hon. Dickinson R. Debevoise

 

Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)

February 12, 2008

BEFORE: SLOVITER, SMITH and 

STAPLETON, Circuit Judges

(Filed: February 13, 2008 )

 

Case: 05-1377 Document: 00316094 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/13/2008
2

 

OPINION OF THE COURT

 

STAPLETON, Circuit Judge:

Appellant Carlos Aguirre pled guilty to using a telephone to facilitate a conspiracy

to distribute cocaine. He was sentenced to 48 months of incarceration. He now appeals

that sentence, arguing (1) that he received ineffective assistance of counsel during the

sentencing phase of his case in the District Court, (2) that the District Court erred in

declining to grant a departure from the Guideline range because of extraordinary family

circumstances, and (3) that the District Court also erred in failing to grant a departure on

the ground that his offense constituted aberrant behavior.

Aguirre’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim was not raised in the District

Court and, as a result, the record was not developed on the issues raised by that claim. In

such situations, we decline to review ineffective assistance of counsel claims on direct

appeal and insist that they be addressed initially in the trial court in a collateral review

proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, see, e.g., United States v. Haywood, 155 F.3d 674,

678 (3d Cir. 1995).

We lack jurisdiction “to review discretionary decisions [of a sentencing court] to

deny departures, unless for allegations of legal error.” United States v. Cooper, 437 F.3d

324, 332 (3d Cir. 2006).

Case: 05-1377 Document: 00316094 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/13/2008
3

For the foregoing reasons, we will affirm the judgment of the District Court

without prejudice to Aguirre pursuing his ineffective assistance of counsel claim in a

proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.

Case: 05-1377 Document: 00316094 Page: 3 Date Filed: 02/13/2008