Court Opinion

ID: 9809092
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 21:00:40.507419+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:24:51.614425
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-4315      Doc: 54         Filed: 08/30/2023      Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                                UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 22-4315

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                             Plaintiff - Appellee,

                      v.

        GARY LYNN GATLIN,

                             Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern of North Carolina, at
        Wilmington. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (7:19−cr−00033−FL−1)

        Submitted: May 18, 2023                                           Decided: August 30, 2023

        Before DIAZ, Chief Judge, RUSHING, Circuit Judge, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: Michael W. Patrick, LAW OFFICE OF MICHAEL W. PATRICK, Chapel
        Hill, North Carolina, for Appellant. Kenneth A. Polite, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Lisa
        H. Miller, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Joshua K. Handell, Appellate Section,
        Criminal Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C.;
        Michael F. Easley, Jr., United States Attorney, David A. Bragdon, Appellate Chief, OFFICE
        OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-4315      Doc: 54         Filed: 08/30/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Defendant Gary Lynn Gatlin appeals his conviction for possessing a firearm as a

        felon (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)) and for two counts of assaulting a federal officer (18 U.S.C.

        § 111). He contends that the district court committed instructional error and that it also

        erred in denying his posttrial motions for a competency hearing under 18 U.S.C. § 4241(a)

        and for a new trial under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33. We have reviewed the

        record and find no reversible error.

               Gatlin also asserts that his trial counsel was unconstitutionally ineffective. But we

        typically reserve ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims for collateral review and will

        decide them on direct appeal only if “counsel’s ineffectiveness conclusively appears on the

        face of the record.” United States v. Glover, 8 F.4th 239, 246 (4th Cir. 2021).

               Here, the four corners of the record don’t conclusively show counsel’s

        ineffectiveness. We therefore dismiss this portion of Gatlin’s appeal, and otherwise affirm

        the district court’s judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

        conclusions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would

        not aid the decisional process.

                                                                           AFFIRMED IN PART
                                                                       AND DISMISSED IN PART

                                                     2