United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Richard Damon Dominguez, Defendant-appellant, 104 F.3d 366 (9th Cir. 1996)

MEMORANDUM^** 

Richard Damon Dominguez appeals his conviction and 37-month sentence following a guilty plea for possession of an unregistered destructive device, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d).¹  Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Dominguez's counsel filed a brief stating that he finds no meritorious issues for review, and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record.

Counsel identified two possible issues for review: (1) did Dominguez receive ineffective assistance of counsel due to counsel's failure to pursue an interlocutory appeal of the district court's denial of his suppression motion, and (2) did Dominguez receive ineffective assistance of counsel due to counsel's recommendation that Dominguez plead guilty.

In general, challenges to a conviction based upon ineffective assistance of counsel are made through collateral attack. United States v. Carr, 18 F.3d 738, 741 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 82 (1994). We do not address such claims on direct appeal unless the record is sufficiently developed to allow resolution of the issues, or unless assistance is so obviously inadequate as to violate a defendant's right to counsel. United States v. Daly, 974 F.2d 1215, 1218 (9th Cir. 1992) (per curiam). The record here is not sufficiently developed to resolve Dominguez's claims. See id.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83 (1988), discloses no further issues for review. Accordingly, the motion of counsel to withdraw is GRANTED and the district court's judgment is AFFIRMED.