Court Opinion

ID: 9380595
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-20 17:00:58.135532+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:25.389272
License: Public Domain

Appellate Case: 22-4067       Document: 010110829075       Date Filed: 03/20/2023     Page: 1
                                                                    FILED
                                                        United States Court of Appeals
                         UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS         Tenth Circuit

                               FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT                         March 20, 2023
                           _________________________________
                                                                         Christopher M. Wolpert
                                                                             Clerk of Court
     UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

          Plaintiff - Appellee,

     v.                                                         No. 22-4067
                                                      (D.C. No. 2:19-CR-00407-JNP-1)
     DOMINIC JAMES FREDRICKSEN,                                   (D. Utah)

          Defendant - Appellant.
                         _________________________________

                               ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
                           _________________________________

 Before PHILLIPS, BALDOCK, and ROSSMAN, Circuit Judges.
                    _________________________________

          On January 9, 2020 Defendant Dominic Fredricksen pleaded guilty to one count of

 Use of Interstate Facilities to Transmit Information about a Minor in violation of 18 U.S.C.

 § 2425. The district court sentenced Defendant to 60 months’ imprisonment followed by

 a life term of supervised release. As part of his plea agreement, Defendant waived the right

 to appeal his conviction or sentence unless he received a sentence greater than 60 months

 imprisonment—the maximum under his guideline range.

 *
   After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
 unanimously to honor the parties’ request for a decision on the briefs without oral
 argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore
 submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent,
 except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It
 may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1
 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.
                                              1
Appellate Case: 22-4067      Document: 010110829075         Date Filed: 03/20/2023      Page: 2

        Defendant nevertheless seeks to appeal his conviction on the ground that he received

 ineffective assistance of counsel before the trial court. After carefully reviewing this case,

 Defendant’s appellate counsel concluded there were no factually or legally non-frivolous

 grounds on which to raise an appeal. Accordingly, Defendant’s counsel filed an Anders

 brief and a motion to withdraw as counsel. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. (1967).

 Defendant did not respond to his counsel’s Anders brief.

        We have reviewed the record and counsel’s Anders brief and agree there are no non-

 frivolous grounds on which Defendant can appeal. Notwithstanding the appellate waiver

 in Defendant’s plea agreement, ineffective assistance of counsel claims are appropriately

 raised in collateral proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. United States v. Galloway, 56

 F.3d 1239, 1240 (10th Cir. 1995) (en banc) (“Ineffective assistance of counsel claims

 should be brought in collateral proceedings, not on direct appeal.”). Although there are

 exceptions to this rule, see United States v. Gallegos, 108 F.3d 1272, 1280 (10th Cir. 1997),

 none apply in this case. Defendant must raise the issue of ineffective assistance of counsel

 in a proceeding under § 2255, should he choose to do so.

        We therefore AFFIRM the district court’s judgment, GRANT counsel’s motion to

 withdraw, and DISMISS Defendant’s ineffective assistance of counsel claims WITHOUT

 PREJUDICE so that he may properly raise them in a collateral proceeding if he so desires.

                                                Entered for the Court

                                                Bobby R. Baldock
                                                Circuit Judge

                                               2