Opinion ID: 12447
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Ineffective Assistance of Counsel (Wright)

Text: Wright claims that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2064 (1984). In this circuit, “a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel cannot be resolved on direct appeal when the claim has not been raised before the district court since no opportunity existed to develop the record on the merits of the allegation.” United States v. Higdon, 832 F.2d 312, 314 (5th Cir. 1987) (citations omitted), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1075, 108 S. Ct. 1051 (1988). Although Wright raised the issue of his counsel’s effectiveness in a rudimentary form in the district court,12 this 11 Wright also complains that his presentence report states that he was a leader in the 415 Bloods and that the gang had been linked to violent crimes in Dallas. Other than arguing that this “unfairly attempted to sway the reader,” he does not allege that he was prejudiced by this reference. He would be hard-pressed to do so given that the district court stated at Wright’s sentencing hearing that he would not consider Wright’s gang-affiliation “either for or against the defendant in any shape, fashion, or form.” 12 After trial but before sentencing, Wright filed a posttrial motion for re-appointment of counsel, in which he complained of the representation he had received from his appointed counsel. At a hearing on this motion and related matters, the district court told Wright that the court was “not really going to get into it with [him] about [his] unhappiness with [his] lawyer.” Wright’s appointed trial counsel continued to represent him through the 27 is not one of the “rare cases” in which the record is sufficiently developed on direct appeal that it would “allow[] us to evaluate fairly the merits of the claim.” Hidgon, 832 F.2d at 314 (citation omitted).