US v. Ryan Thurlow, No. 12-4366 (4th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-4366 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. RYAN DEAN THURLOW, Defendant - Appellant. No. 12-4367 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. RYAN DEAN THURLOW, Defendant - Appellant. No. 12-4372 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. RYAN DEAN THURLOW, Defendant - Appellant. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder, District Judge. (1:11-cr-00048-TDS-1; 1:11-cr-00222-TDS-1; 1:11-cr-00223-TDS-1) Submitted: March 15, 2013 Decided: March 21, 2013 Before KING, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jorgelina E. Araneda, ARANEDA LAW FIRM, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Ripley Rand, United States Attorney, Michael A. DeFranco, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Ryan Dean Thurlow appeals his conviction and sentence following his guilty plea pursuant to a written plea agreement to two counts of carrying and using by brandishing a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(ii) (2006). denied the effective assistance advised him to plead guilty. Thurlow contends that he was of counsel when his counsel We affirm. Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are not cognizable on direct appeal demonstrates ineffectiveness. unless the record clearly United States v. Baldovinos, 434 F.3d 233, 239 (4th Cir. 2006); see also United States v. King, 119 F.3d 290, 295 (4th Cir. 1997) ( [I]t is well settled that a claim of ineffective assistance should be raised in a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 appeal, motion in unless the the district record court rather conclusively than shows assistance. ) (internal quotation marks omitted). on direct ineffective After review of the record, we conclude that Thurlow has not conclusively shown that his counsel was ineffective. Accordingly, we affirm the district court s judgment. * We dispense with oral argument * because the facts and legal In light of this decision, Thurlow s challenge to the imposition of two supervised release revocation sentences also fails. 3 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 4