United States of America v. Rodney W. Whitney

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-4528
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
RODNEY W. WHITNEY,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney,
Chief District Judge. (3:11-cr-00049-FDW-1)
Submitted: June 9, 2015 Decided: June 24, 2015
Before DUNCAN and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David G. Belser, BELSER & PARKE, Asheville, North Carolina, for
Appellant. Jill Westmoreland Rose, Acting United States
Attorney, Leslie R. Caldwell, Assistant Attorney General,
Sung-Hee Suh, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Ellen R.
Meltzer, Special Counsel, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 3 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Rodney W. Whitney pled guilty pursuant to a plea agreement
to conspiracy to commit mail fraud and wire fraud, in violation
of 18 U.S.C. § 1349 (2012), and conspiracy to commit money
laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h) (2012). He was
sentenced to two concurrent terms of 60 months’ imprisonment and
ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $2,077,488.39.
On appeal from the district court’s June 2014 amended judgment,
Whitney argues that trial counsel rendered ineffective
assistance in failing to object to the district court’s order of
restitution and the application of a 2-level enhancement to his
offense level under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3B1.1(c)
(2011) for his aggravating role.
We decline to reach Whitney’s claims of ineffective
assistance of counsel. Unless an attorney’s ineffectiveness
conclusively appears on the face of the record, ineffective
assistance claims generally are not addressed on direct appeal.
United States v. Benton, 523 F.3d 424, 435 (4th Cir. 2008).
Instead, such claims should be raised in a motion brought
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012), in order to permit
sufficient development of the record. United States v.
Baptiste, 596 F.3d 214, 216 n.1 (4th Cir. 2010). Because the
record does not conclusively establish ineffective assistance of

-- 2 of 3 --

3
counsel, we conclude that these claims should be raised, if at
all, in a § 2255 motion.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s amended
judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED

-- 3 of 3 --