United States v. Risper

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: September 23, 1999
• Docket: 98-4241
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. No. 98-4241 RODNEY EARL RISPER, a/k/a Menace, a/k/a Rodney Risper, Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CR-97-134-BR)

Submitted: May 11, 1999

Decided: September 23, 1999

Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HALL,* Senior Circuit Judge.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Deveraux L. Cannick, AIELLO & CANNICK, Maspeth, New York, for Appellant. Janice McKenzie Cole, United States Attorney, Anne _________________________________________________________________ *Senior Judge Hall participated in the consideration of this case but died prior to the time the decision was filed. The decision is filed by a quorum of the panel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 46(d). M. Hayes, Assistant United States Attorney, Eric Evenson, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Appellant Rodney Earl Risper appeals his convictions and sen- tences, pursuant to his plea of guilty, on one count of conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute cocaine and cocaine base, 21 U.S.C.A. §§ 841, 846 (West 1981 & Supp. 1998), and one count of use and carry of a firearm in relation to a drug trafficking crime, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1) (1994) (current version at 18 U.S.C.A. § 924 (c)(1) (West Supp. 1999). Risper contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel, that Government prosecutors engaged in misconduct, and that the evidence was insufficient to sup- port his guilty plea to the § 924(c)(1) charge. We affirm.

Because the claims regarding ineffective assistance of counsel and prosecutorial misconduct rely on evidence not in the record, we find that these claims are better raised, if at all, in a motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). See United States v. Hanley, 974 F.2d 14, 16 n.2 (4th Cir. 1992) (court will not review ineffective assistance of counsel claims on direct appeal unless it con- clusively appears on the record that appellant was not provided with effective representation).

Looking at the entire record, we find that the evidence was suffi- cient to support the finding that Risper carried a firearm during and in relation to a drug trafficking offense. See United States v. Mitchell, 104 F.3d 649, 653 (4th Cir. 1997); United States v. Zorrilla, 982 F.2d 28, 30 (1st Cir. 1992).

2 Accordingly, we affirm Risper's convictions and sentences. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argu- ment would not aid in the decisional process.

AFFIRMED