US v. Cory Lindsay, No. 10-4426 (4th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-4426 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CORY DESHAWN LINDSAY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, District Judge. (3:08-cr-00216-FDW-1) Submitted: December 17, 2010 Decided: January 13, 2011 Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Susan S. Kister, St. Louis, Missouri, for Appellant. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, Mark A. Jones, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Cory Deshawn Lindsay pled guilty pursuant to a plea agreement to possession with intent to distribute cocaine base crack (Count 1) and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) (2006) (Count 2). He was sentenced to 240 months of imprisonment on the drug charge and 120 months appeal, concurrently counsel California, 386 has U.S. for filed 738 a the firearm brief (1967), violation. pursuant asserting to On Anders there are v. no meritorious grounds for appeal, but raising the following issue: whether Lindsay received ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Lindsay has failed to establish the demanding grounds needed to raise ineffective assistance of counsel at this juncture. Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are not cognizable on establishes direct appeal ineffective unless assistance. the record United Richardson, 195 F.3d 192, 198 (4th Cir. 1999). conclusively States v. Rather, to allow for adequate development of the record, claims of ineffective assistance generally should be brought in a 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2010) motion. United States v. Gastiaburo, 16 F.3d 582, 590 (4th Cir. 1994). In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. 2 We therefore affirm Lindsay s convictions and sentence. This court requires that counsel inform Lindsay, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Lindsay requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Lindsay. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal before contentions the court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials decisional process. AFFIRMED 3
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.
