No. 09-4898
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. John Preston Bailey,
Chief District Judge. (3:09-cr-00032-JPB-DJJ-1)
Submitted:
Decided:
PER CURIAM:
Charles
with
various
Ward
felony
was
drug
charged
in
offenses.
six-count
Pursuant
indictment
to
plea
He now
For
appeal,
assistance
Ward
of
argues
counsel
that
at
he
his
was
plea
denied
the
hearing
and
special
assessment
within
forty
(40)
days
following
Government
argues
that
Wards
appeal
should
be
valid
waiver
would
not
prevent
Ward
from
Therefore, the
unless
defense
counsel
it
conclusively
did
not
appears
provide
from
effective
the
record
that
representation.
United States v. Richardson, 195 F.3d 192, 198 (4th Cir. 1999)
(internal
quotation
marks
and
alterations
omitted).
To
counsels
unprofessional
errors,
3
the
result
of
the
proceeding
would
have
been
different.
Strickland
plea
agreement,
where
defendant
v.
In the context
claims
ineffective
that
there
is
reasonable
probability
that,
but
for
is
proceeding
advised
reasonable
would
regarding
assessment.
In
have
the
the
probability
been
different
necessity
to
alternative,
He insists that
that
the
result
had
Ward
been
timely
Ward
pay
claims
of
the
properly
the
special
that
counsel
should not have advised him to enter into the plea agreement
Wards
contentions,
his
counsels
alleged
that he did not have the money to pay the special assessment due
to his indigency, and states on appeal only that he may well
have
been
able
to
timely
marshal
the
money
to
satisfy
the
not assert that he would not have taken the plea had counsel
properly informed him about the special assessment fee.
even
assuming
counsels
actions
could
be
Thus,
considered
he
received
responsibility.
two-level
reduction
for
acceptance
of
advice
of
to
take
the
reasonableness.
plea
See
fell
below
Strickland,
466
an
objective
U.S.
at
689
conduct
falls
within
the
wide
range
of
reasonable
might
be
considered
sound
trial
strategy
(internal
Ward
counsel on that matter at the hearing, and the record does not
contain any affidavit or response from trial counsel indicating
what he recalls telling Ward regarding relevant conduct and, if
he failed to discuss it with Ward, why he chose not to disclose
that information.
dispense
with
oral
argument
because
the
facts
and
legal
AFFIRMED