United States v. McLeod
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 96-30056 Summary Calendar __________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
BILLY D. MCLEOD,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana USDC No. 94-CR-74 A M2 - - - - - - - - - - June 19, 1996 Before GARWOOD, WIENER and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Billy D. McLeod, # 02571-095, moves for permission to appeal
in forma pauperis (IFP) the denial of his motion pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2255. McLeod argues that his guilty plea was
involuntary due to ineffective assistance of counsel based on
erroneous advice regarding his sentencing guidelines range,
erroneous advice that he could not withdraw his guilty plea, and
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. No. 96-30056 -2-
failure to advise that his arrest and the search of his home were
illegal. He also argues that the Government breached its plea
agreement. He also argues that counsel was ineffective for
advising him not to file a direct appeal. He further argues that
his arrest and the search of his home were illegal.
We have reviewed the record, the district court's opinion,
and appellant's brief and discern no reversible error. See
United States v. McLeod, No. 94-74-A (M.D. La. Sept. 1, 1995).
Further, we hold that McLeod's appeal is frivolous, and
accordingly, we DENY IFP and DISMISS the appeal as frivolous.
See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 212, 220 (5th Cir. 1983); 5th Cir.
R. 42.2.
IFP DENIED, APPEAL DISMISSED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
United States v. McLeod (United States v. McLeod) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.