Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-04159/USCOURTS-ca4-15-04159-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Hector Manuel Castaneda Gastelo
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-4159

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

HECTOR MANUEL CASTANEDA GASTELO, a/k/a Frankie, a/k/a Felix,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, 

Chief District Judge. (3:13-cr-00264-FDW-1)

Submitted: January 29, 2015 Decided: February 24, 2016

Before KING, GREGORY, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William D. Auman, AUMAN LAW OFFICES, Asheville, North Carolina, 

for Appellant. Jill Westmoreland Rose, United States Attorney, 

Anthony J. Enright, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, 

North Carolina, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-4159 Doc: 35 Filed: 02/24/2016 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Hector Manuel Castaneda Gastelo appeals his 240-month 

sentence after pleading guilty to conspiracy to distribute and 

possess with the intent to distribute heroin, in violation of 

21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A), 846 (2012). Gastelo argues 

that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance and that 

prosecutorial misconduct occurred. We decline to consider 

Gastelo’s ineffective assistance claim on direct appeal because 

the record does not conclusively establish his counsel’s 

ineffectiveness. See United States v. Baptiste, 596 F.3d 214, 

216 n.1 (4th Cir. 2010). We also reject his claim of 

prosecutorial misconduct because the Government’s statement that 

it would seek to enforce a provision of the plea agreement if 

Gastelo sought to withdraw his guilty plea — a statement made in 

response to an inquiry from the district court — was not 

improper. See United States v. Kennedy, 372 F.3d 686, 696 (4th 

Cir. 2004) (stating standard).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. 

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

Appeal: 15-4159 Doc: 35 Filed: 02/24/2016 Pg: 2 of 2