US v. Morgan Sparks, No. 14-4800 (4th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-4800 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MORGAN LEWIS SPARKS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (5:11-cr-00073-RLV-DSC-15) Submitted: November 19, 2015 Decided: November 23, 2015 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Wayne Buchanan Eads, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Jill Westmoreland Rose, Acting United States Attorney, Amy E. Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Pursuant guilty to to a plea conspiracy distribute, and agreement, to Morgan distribute, manufacture Lewis possess Sparks with methamphetamine, pled intent 21 to U.S.C. §§ 841(b)(1)(A), 846 (2012), and possession of a firearm during and in relation to § 924(c) (2012). a drug trafficking offense, 18 U.S.C. The district court sentenced Sparks to the mandatory minimum sentence of 120 months’ imprisonment on the conspiracy offense firearm charge. arguing that and a consecutive 60-month term on the Sparks appeals, challenging his sentence and trial counsel was ineffective for failing to challenge the drug quantity attributed to him at sentencing. For the reasons that follow, we dismiss the appeal. Sparks seeks to challenge his sentence, arguing that the evidence was insufficient of determination to weight the drug support offense level for sentencing. used the to district compute court’s his base In the plea agreement, Sparks waived his right to appeal his conviction or sentence except in the case of ineffective assistance or prosecutorial misconduct. Because Sparks dismiss this waived portion his of right his to appeal. appeal See his sentence, United States we v. Manigan, 592 F.3d 621, 627 (4th Cir. 2010) (upholding validity of appeal waiver if knowingly and voluntarily made). 2 Sparks does not challenge the validity of his appeal waiver, but contends that his challenge falls outside the scope of the waiver. He argues that the sentencing error was due to ineffective assistance of counsel, which is an exception to his waiver. He contends that his attorney provided ineffective assistance by allowing him to plead guilty pursuant to a plea agreement quantity that than contained was a stipulation supported by the of a evidence greater and drug thereby subjecting Sparks to a ten-year mandatory minimum sentence. Unless an attorney’s ineffectiveness conclusively appears on the face of the record, ineffective assistance claims are not generally addressed on direct appeal. 523 F.3d 424, 435 (4th Cir. 2008). United States v. Benton, Instead, such claims should be raised in a motion brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012), in order to permit sufficient development of the record. United 2010). counsel States v. Baptiste, 596 F.3d 214, 216 n.1 (4th Cir. Because the record does not conclusively establish that provided ineffective assistance to Sparks, his ineffective assistance challenge may not be raised on direct appeal, and does not therefore afford Sparks the opportunity to appeal the sentencing determination. See Benton, 523 F.3d at 435. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 3 presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 4
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.
