Case: 09-30464     Document: 00511117035          Page: 1    Date Filed: 05/20/2010




            IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                     FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT  United States Court of Appeals
                                                     Fifth Circuit

                                                  FILED
                                                                            May 20, 2010
                                     No. 09-30464
                                   Summary Calendar                         Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                 Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                   Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

BOBBY D. CURTIS,

                                                   Defendant-Appellant


                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Western District of Louisiana
                             USDC No. 1:08-CR-207-1


Before KING, BARKSDALE, and GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
        Bobby D. Curtis appeals both his guilty-plea conviction and sentence for
concealment of bankruptcy assets, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 152(1). His only
contention, however, is that his counsel rendered ineffective assistance by:
failing to produce any evidence regarding the valuation of E-rate contracts;
giving incorrect advice regarding the statute of limitations for concealment of
bankruptcy assets; and failing to ascertain facts regarding the amount of assets
Curtis allegedly concealed.

        *
         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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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.
   Case: 09-30464    Document: 00511117035 Page: 2        Date Filed: 05/20/2010
                                 No. 09-30464

       Generally, our court declines to review ineffective-assistance claims on
direct appeal; an exception is in “rare cases where the record allow[s the court]
to evaluate fairly the merits of the claim”. United States v. Kizzee, 

,
502 (5th Cir. 1998) (quoting United States v. Higdon, 

, 314 (5th Cir.
1987)). The record at hand is not sufficiently developed to permit direct review
of Curtis’ ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims. See 

(declining
to consider ineffective-assistance claim where no testimony was taken nor
factual findings made regarding that claim). Therefore, we decline to consider
Curtis’ ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims.    This, of course, is without
prejudice to his right to present them in a motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
See 

(citing United States v. Price, 

, 369 (5th Cir. 1996)).
      AFFIRMED.




                                        2