United States v. Luna

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
December 12, 2002
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-40894
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ARTURO LUNA, also known as Art Luna,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. B-00-CR-496-3
--------------------
December 12, 2002
Before JOLLY, JONES, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Arturo Luna appeals his conviction following a guilty plea
for conspiracy to possess more than 100 kilograms of marijuana
with intent to distribute. 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B),
846. Luna argues that his retained trial counsel rendered
ineffective assistance in purportedly failing to review the
presentence report (PSR) with him and in failing to file
objections to the PSR, despite having obtained an extension of

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 01-40894
-2-
time in which to file objections. He contends that counsel
should have objected to the three-level increase in his base
offense level for his aggravating role in the offense. See
U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(b). This court declines to review a claim of
ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal where, as
here, the record is not sufficiently developed to allow the court
to evaluate fairly the merits of the claim. See United States v.
Gibson, 55 F.3d 173, 179 (5th Cir. 1995); United States v.
Higdon, 832 F.2d 312, 314 (5th Cir. 1987). The judgment of the
district court is AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --