Court Opinion

ID: 2964985
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:33:48.073806+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:02:02.590187
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                 ____________________

        No. 97-1186

                                    UNITED STATES,

                                      Appellee,

                                          v.

                                   JOHN R. COLLINS,

                                Defendant, Appellant.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                              FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE

                     [Hon. D. Brock Hornby, U.S. District Judge]
                                            ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                Torruella, Chief Judge,
                                           ___________
                           Stahl and Lynch, Circuit Judges.
                                            ______________

                                 ____________________

            Robert R. Andrew on brief for appellant.
            ________________

                                 ____________________

                                  November 12, 1997
                                 ____________________

                      Per  Curiam.     John  Collins  appeals   from  his
                      ___________

            conviction and sentence for conspiring to possess with intent

            to distribute and  to distribute cocaine  in violation of  21

            U.S.C.    841(a), 841(b)(1), and 846.  Appellate  counsel has

            filed a  brief  under  Anders  v. California,  386  U.S.  738
                                   ______     __________

            (1967),  and a motion to  withdraw.  Counsel notified Collins

            of his  right to file  a supplemental brief, but  Collins has

            not done so.  After fully reviewing the record, we agree that

            there is no meritorious ground  for appeal, and so we affirm,

            with the qualification noted further below.  

                      Collins  pled  guilty  at  a  plea  hearing   which

            conformed  substantially to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 requirements.

            He agreed  with a prosecution  version of the  evidence which

            made clear that there was a factual basis for his guilty plea

            and which confirmed that he  knew that he was pleading guilty

            to  a crime  involving  crack  cocaine.    Consequently,  the

            district   court  properly  accepted   his  guilty  plea  and

            sentenced him  for conspiring  to possess  and to  distribute

            crack cocaine, even  though the information charged  him only

            with conspiring to possess and  to distribute "cocaine."  See
                                                                      ___

            United  States v.  Bush, 70  F.3d 557,  562 (10th  Cir. 1995)
            ______________     ____

            (rejecting  claim for  resentencing or  withdrawal of  guilty

            plea  to  cocaine   base  offense  on  ground   of  ambiguous

            indictment  for  conspiring  to  distribute  "cocaine  and/or

            cocaine  base" where the  defendant's admissions in  his plea

                                         -2-

            agreement and at the plea  hearing showed his intent to plead

            guilty  to  conspiring  to  distribute cocaine  base),  cert.
                                                                    _____

            denied, 116 S. Ct. 795 (1996).
            ______

                      The Anders  brief also asserted  that trial counsel
                          ______

            had  represented  Collins  ineffectively,  but  our   general

            practice is  not to  consider such  claims on direct  appeal.

            See United States v. Mala, 7 F.3d 1058, 1063 (1st Cir. 1993),
            ___ _____________    ____

            cert. denied,  511 U.S. 1086 (1994).  Accordingly, we dismiss
            ____________

            the  claim  of ineffective  assistance  without  prejudice to

            Collins' right to  assert it in a  post-conviction proceeding

            under 28 U.S.C.   2255.  Id.
                                     ___

                      We  affirm  appellant's  conviction  and  sentence,
                      ___________________________________________________

            without  prejudice  to  his  right to  assert  his  claim  of
            _____________________________________________________________

            ineffective assistance  of trial  counsel under  28 U.S.C.   
            _____________________________________________________________

            2255.  We grant appellate counsel's motion to withdraw.
            _______________________________________________________

                                         -3-