USA v. Faulkner, No. 23-60306 (5th Cir. 2024)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 23-60306 Document: 60-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/09/2024 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 23-60306 Summary Calendar ____________ FILED May 9, 2024 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Lakeith M. Faulkner, Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi USDC No. 3:22-CR-141-1 ______________________________ Before Willett, Duncan, and Ramirez, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * Lakeith M. Faulkner appeals his guilty plea conviction and 62-month sentence for conspiracy to commit wire fraud. He argues that his counsel in the district court provided ineffective assistance prior to the guilty plea hearing and sentencing by failing to adequately investigate loss and restitution. He further asserts that his counsel failed to: request a downward _____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 23-60306 Document: 60-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/09/2024 No. 23-60306 departure based on his diminished capacity, raise a certain challenge to the gross receipts sentencing enhancement, and provide evidence in support of the abuse of trust enhancement. Although Faulkner made allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel in a post-sentencing motion, the district court neither held a hearing nor issued a ruling on these issues. As a result, the record is not sufficiently developed to enable this court to “fairly evaluate” the merits of Faulkner’s ineffective assistance claim on direct appeal. United States v. Jones, 969 F.3d 192, 200 (5th Cir. 2020); see United States v. Aguilar, 503 F.3d 431, 436 (5th Cir. 2007). We therefore decline to consider Faulkner’s ineffective assistance claim at this time without prejudice to Faulkner’s right to raise that claim in a proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Jones, 969 F.3d at 200. AFFIRMED. 2

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.