US v. Richard Blue, No. 09-4094 (4th Cir. 2009)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-4094 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. RICHARD GEREL BLUE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (1:08-cr-00097-LHT-1) Submitted: August 20, 2009 Decided: August 31, 2009 Before GREGORY and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Richard Gerel Blue, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Richard Gerel Blue pleaded guilty to possession of ammunition after having been convicted of a crime punishable by more than a year, in violation of 18 U.S.C. ยง 922(g)(1) (2006). The district court imprisonment. se. sentenced Blue to twenty-seven months of On direct appeal, Blue has chosen to proceed pro Construing his claims liberally, Blue asserts that his counsel rendered ineffective assistance, that the district court erred in denying his request for new counsel, and that he was denied a fair trial because he did not have an opportunity to review all the Government s evidence. Finding no error, we affirm. Blue first claims that his counsel was ineffective for failing to communicate with him about his case. To prove a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must show (1) that (2) that the Strickland v. respect to counsel s counsel s deficient performance Washington, the first 466 U.S. prong, performance reasonableness. performance fell Id. at 688. the below was deficient, prejudiced 668, 687 defendant an the defense. (1984). must objective With show standard that of In addition, [j]udicial scrutiny of counsel s performance must be highly deferential. 689. and Id. at Under the second prong of the test in the context of a conviction following a guilty 2 plea, a defendant can show prejudice only by demonstrating a reasonable probability that, but for counsel s errors, he would not have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial. Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 59 (1985). This court may address a claim of ineffective assistance on direct appeal only if the lawyer s ineffectiveness conclusively Baldovinos, appears 434 F.3d on 233, the record. 239 (4th United Cir. 2006). States We v. have thoroughly reviewed the record and conclude that Blue has failed to demonstrate that ineffective assistance conclusively appears on the record and, therefore, we decline to address this claim. Blue next argues that the district court denied him a fair trial when it refused to appoint new counsel to represent him. We have thoroughly reviewed the record, however, and there is no evidence to suggest that Blue requested the appointment of substitute counsel in the district court. Therefore, this claim is without merit. Finally, Blue argues that he was denied a fair trial when he was not given access to a piece of evidence regarding the traffic stop allegedly maintained by the Government. We have thoroughly reviewed the record and conclude that this claim is also without merit. See Tollett v. Henderson, 411 U.S. 258, 267 (1973) (when defendant pleads guilty voluntarily, he waives 3 challenges to deprivations of constitutional rights occurring prior to guilty plea). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. legal before We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions the court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials decisional process. AFFIRMED 4
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
