UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. JASON BECKHAM (2017)

Jason L. Beckham pled guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute 280 grams or more of cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (2012). Beckham appeals his conviction, arguing that plea counsel was ineffective. We previously denied the government's motion to dismiss Beckham's appeal on this claim, and the matter has now been fully briefed and is ripe for review. We affirm.

We do not consider ineffective assistance claims on direct appeal “[u]nless an attorney's ineffectiveness conclusively appears on the face of the record.” United States v. Faulls, 821 F.3d 502, 507 (4th Cir. 2016). To prevail on his ineffective assistance of counsel claim, Beckham “must show that counsel's performance was deficient” and “that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense.” Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984). In the plea context, “to satisfy the ‘prejudice’ requirement, [Beckham] must show that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's errors, he would not have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial.” Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 59 (1985). We “need not determine whether counsel's performance was deficient before examining the prejudice suffered by [Beckham] as a result of the alleged deficiencies.” Strickland, 466 U.S. at 697.

Beckham argues that evidence in the present record shows that he was devoted to his family and, therefore, that he would not have pled guilty had counsel correctly informed him of his full sentencing exposure. We conclude that this conjecture does not amount to a conclusive showing on the face of the record that Beckham would not have pled guilty but for counsel's errors. Because the record does not conclusively establish ineffective assistance of counsel, this claim should be raised, if at all, in a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. See Faulls, 821 F.3d at 507; see also Massaro v. United States, 538 U.S. 500, 504-07 (2003) (discussing standard).

Accordingly, we affirm Beckham's conviction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

PER CURIAM: