Opinion
22-4083
07-27-2023
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. OMEL MCLEAN, a/k/a Webb, a/k/a Webster Perry, Defendant-Appellant.
Mark Bodner, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellant. Jessica D. Aber, United States Attorney, Aidan Taft Grano-Mickelson, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, E. Rebecca Gantt, Assistant United States Attorney, Megan M. Montoya, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: July 25, 2023
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, Senior District Judge. (2:21-cr-00050-RAJ-DEM-1)
Mark Bodner, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellant.
Jessica D. Aber, United States Attorney, Aidan Taft Grano-Mickelson, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, E. Rebecca Gantt, Assistant United States Attorney, Megan M. Montoya, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WYNN and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM
Omel McLean pleaded guilty, pursuant to a written plea agreement, to sex trafficking by force, fraud and coercion, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1591(a)(1), and the district court imposed a 360-month sentence. In his opening brief on appeal, McLean challenged the procedural reasonableness of his sentence and also argued that he had received ineffective assistance of counsel. The Government moved to dismiss the portions of McLean's appeal challenging his sentence as barred by the appeal waiver in his plea agreement. This Court granted the Government's motion. The parties have now completed briefing on the remaining claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; however, in his reply brief, McLean concedes that the face of the record does not conclusively establish ineffective assistance of counsel. See United States v. Baptiste, 596 F.3d 214, 216 n.1 (4th Cir. 2010).
Accordingly, we affirm the criminal judgment. 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.