U.S. v. MORALES, 225 Fed.Appx. 234 (5th Cir. 2007)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alejandro MORALES, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-50509 Conference Calendar.United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
April 17, 2007.

[EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Louis Elias Lopez, Law Office of Louis E. Lopez, El Paso, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, USDC No. 3:05-CR-1775-ALL.

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:[*]

[*] 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.

Alejandro Morales appeals the 87-month sentence he received after pleading guilty to possession with intent to distribute more than five kilograms of cocaine. He contends that his sentence, which was already below the statutory minimum, would have been even lower if his trial counsel had adequately explained to him

Page 235

the necessity for complete truthfulness in his discussions with the Government.

A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel generally will not be considered for the first time on direct appeal because there has not been an opportunity to develop evidence on the claim United States v. Lampazianie, 251 F.3d 519, 527 (5th Cir. 2001). The record here has not been sufficiently developed to permit consideration of Morales’s claim on direct appeal.

Accordingly, without prejudice to Morales’s right to file a motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.