Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Hector Manuel Castaneda GASTELO, a/k/a Frankie, a/k/a Felix, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-02-24
Citations: 633 F. App'x 164
Docket Number: No. 15-4159
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Hector Manuel Castaneda GASTELO, a/k/a Frankie, a/k/a Felix, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before KING, GREGORY, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 633
Pages: 164–164

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Hector Manuel Castaneda GASTELO, a/k/a Frankie, a/k/a Felix, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-4159.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Jan. 29, 2015.
Decided: Feb. 24, 2016.
William D. Auman, Auman Law Offices, Asheville, NC, for Appellant. Jill West-moreland Rose, United States Attorney, Anthony J. Enright, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, NC, for Appel-lee.
Before KING, GREGORY, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Hector Manuel Castaneda Gástelo 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). Gástelo argues that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance and that prosecutorial misconduct occurred. We decline to consider Gas-telo'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 Gástelo 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.