United States v. Alonzo

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT April 20, 2005
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 04-50655
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RUBEN ALONZO,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 3:03-CR-2227-ALL-KC
--------------------
Before JONES, SMITH, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Ruben Alonzo appeals his guilty-plea conviction and sentence
for importing marijuana into the United States, in violation of
21 U.S.C. §§ 952, 960. He argues that his counsel rendered
constitutionally ineffective assistance by failing to investigate
adequately his criminal history. Alonzo alleges that, before
advising him to enter a plea agreement, counsel did not have an
accurate idea of the applicable guideline range.
The trial court allowed Alonzo’s initial attorney to
withdraw and substituted new counsel prior to sentencing Alonzo.
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
No. 04-50655
-2-
Thereafter, Alonzo neither moved to withdraw his guilty plea nor
raised the issue of ineffective assistance of counsel in the
district court. We conclude that the record is insufficiently
developed to allow consideration of this issue on direct appeal.
See United States v. Price, 95 F.3d 364, 369 (5th Cir. 1996);
United States v. Higdon, 832 F.2d 312, 314 (5th Cir. 1987).
Accordingly, without prejudice to Alonzo’s right to file a motion
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, the judgment of the district court
is AFFIRMED.