Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Antonio QUIROGA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-04-11
Citations: 177 F. App'x 386
Docket Number: No. 05-40876
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Antonio QUIROGA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 177
Pages: 386–387

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Antonio QUIROGA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-40876.
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Decided April 11, 2006.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Crispin Quintanilla, III, Garcia, Quintanilla & Palacios, McAllen, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Antonio Quiroga appeals following his conviction for possession of 118 kilograms of marijuana with intent to distribute. Quiroga argues that counsel rendered ineffective assistance for failing to file a motion to suppress, failing to object to hearsay evidence, and failing to object to evidence concerning Quiroga's silence following his arrest.
As a general rule, this court declines to review claims of ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal, although we may do so in exceptional cases. United States v. Higdon, 832 F.2d 312, 313-14 (5th Cir.1987). This is not the exceptional case. Accordingly, we decline to review Quiroga's ineffective assistance claims in this direct appeal. The judgment of the district court is affirmed without prejudice to Quiroga's right to raise them in a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. We express no view on the merits of such a motion.
AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.