United States v. Jerry Lee Berry, Jr.

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedDecember 1, 1999
Docket99-1603
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Jerry Lee Berry, Jr. (United States v. Jerry Lee Berry, Jr.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Jerry Lee Berry, Jr., (8th Cir. 1999).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _____________

No. 99-1603SI _____________

United States of America, * * On Appeal from the United Appellee, * States District Court * for the Southern District v. * of Iowa. * Jerry Lee Berry, Jr., * [Not to be Published] * Appellant. * ___________

Submitted: October 29, 1999 Filed: December 1, 1999 ___________

Before McMILLIAN, RICHARD S. ARNOLD, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges. ___________

PER CURIAM.

Jerry Lee Berry, Jr., pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. The District Court1 sentenced Berry to fifteen years and eight months in prison and five years supervised release. On appeal, Berry claims that his counsel was ineffective in that counsel’s previous representation of other defendants

1 The Honorable R. E. Longstaff, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa. in a related drug case created a conflict of interest, and counsel did not properly investigate the government’s case.

We believe Berry’s ineffective-assistance claims would be more appropriately addressed in a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 proceeding before the district court where a record can be fully developed. See United States v. Santana, 150 F.3d 860, 863 (8th Cir. 1998) (claims of ineffective assistance are considered on direct appeal “only in those exceptional cases in which the district court has developed a record on the ineffectiveness issues or where the result would otherwise be a plain miscarriage of justice”); see also United States v. Martinez-Cruz, 186 F.3d 1102, 1105 (8th Cir. 1999) (ineffective-assistance claim best presented in § 2255 motion). Therefore, we decline to address these claims. Accordingly, we affirm Berry’s conviction and sentence.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

-2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Flavio Diaz Santana
150 F.3d 860 (Eighth Circuit, 1998)
United States v. Gustavo Martinez-Cruz
186 F.3d 1102 (Eighth Circuit, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Jerry Lee Berry, Jr., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-jerry-lee-berry-jr-ca8-1999.