United States v. Terry Croff

Ninth Circuit

United States v. Terry Croff

668 F. App'x 313

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedAugust 23, 2016

Docket15-30247

StatusUnpublished

This text of 668 F. App'x 313 (United States v. Terry Croff) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth 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. Terry Croff, 668 F. App'x 313 (9th Cir. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Terry Michael Croff appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 132-month sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm, but remand to correct the judgment.

Croff contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because counsel failed to secure a more favorable ■ plea agreement from the government and failed to make a number of arguments during the sentencing hearing. Contrary to Croff s contention, the record does not permit us to consider this claim on direct appeal. See United States v. Rahman, 642 F.3d 1267, 1269-60 (9th Cir. 2011) (this court reviews ineffective assistance claims on direct appeal only where the record is sufficiently developed or inadequate representation is obvious).

We remand to the district court with instructions that it correct the judgment to reflect that Croff was convicted of violating 21 U.S.C. § 846, rather than 18 U.S.C. § 846 as currently stated in the judgment. See United States v. Herrera-Blanco, 232 F.3d 715, 719 (9th Cir. 2000) (remanding sua sponte to correct the judgment).

AFFIRMED; REMANDED to correct the judgment.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3,

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

MEMORANDUM **

Terry Michael Croff appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges his guilty-plea conviction and 132-month sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm, but remand to correct the judgment.

Croff contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because counsel failed to secure a more favorable ■ plea agreement from the government and failed to make a number of arguments during the sentencing hearing. Contrary to Croff s contention, the record does not permit us to consider this claim on direct appeal. See United States v. Rahman, 642 F.3d 1267, 1269-60 (9th Cir. 2011) (this court reviews ineffective assistance claims on direct appeal only where the record is sufficiently developed or inadequate representation is obvious).

We remand to the district court with instructions that it correct the judgment to reflect that Croff was convicted of violating 21 U.S.C. § 846, rather than 18 U.S.C. § 846 as currently stated in the judgment. See United States v. Herrera-Blanco, 232 F.3d 715, 719 (9th Cir. 2000) (remanding sua sponte to correct the judgment).

AFFIRMED; REMANDED to correct the judgment.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3,

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

668 F. App'x 313, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-terry-croff-ca9-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack