Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Arturo Aburto SANCHEZ, a/k/a Gustavo, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-09-16
Citations: 668 F. App'x 544
Docket Number: No. 16-4035
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Arturo Aburto SANCHEZ, a/k/a Gustavo, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before TRAXLER, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 668
Pages: 544–544

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Arturo Aburto SANCHEZ, a/k/a Gustavo, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 16-4035
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: September 13, 2016
Decided: September 16, 2016
David G. Belser, BELSER & PARKE, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellant. Jill Westmoreland Rose, United States Attorney, Anthony J. Enright, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before TRAXLER, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Arturo Aburto Sanchez appeals his conviction for possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B) (2012). He argues that sentencing counsel rendered ineffective assistance in failing to object to one paragraph of the presentence report, ask for a variance, and present mitigating evidence that might have justified a variance. We affirm.
A prisoner "may raise a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel in the first instance on direct appeal if and only if it conclusively appears from the record that counsel did not provide effective assistance." United States v. Galloway, 749 F.3d 238, 241 (4th Cir. 2014) (alteration and ellipsis omitted). Absent such a showing, ineffective assistance claims should be raised in a motion brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012), in order to permit sufficient development of the record. United States v. Baptiste, 596 F.3d 214, 216 n.1 (4th Cir. 2010). Because the record here does not conclusively establish the alleged grounds for Sanchez's claims, Sanchez does not meet this demanding standard. These claims should be raised, if at all, in a § 2255 motion.
Accordingly, because Sanchez raises no claims that can be resolved in this appeal, we dismiss the appeal. 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.
DISMISSED