
USCA1 Opinion

	




                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT                                 ____________________        No. 97-1186                                    UNITED STATES,                                      Appellee,                                          v.                                   JOHN R. COLLINS,                                Defendant, Appellant.                                 ____________________                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT                              FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE                     [Hon. D. Brock Hornby, U.S. District Judge]                                            ___________________                                 ____________________                                        Before                                Torruella, Chief Judge,                                           ___________                           Stahl and Lynch, Circuit Judges.                                            ______________                                 ____________________            Robert R. Andrew on brief for appellant.            ________________                                 ____________________                                  November 12, 1997                                 ____________________                      Per  Curiam.     John  Collins  appeals   from  his                      ___________            conviction and sentence for conspiring to possess with intent            to distribute and  to distribute cocaine  in violation of  21            U.S.C.    841(a), 841(b)(1), and 846.  Appellate  counsel has            filed a  brief  under  Anders  v. California,  386  U.S.  738                                   ______     __________            (1967),  and a motion to  withdraw.  Counsel notified Collins            of his  right to file  a supplemental brief, but  Collins has            not done so.  After fully reviewing the record, we agree that            there is no meritorious ground  for appeal, and so we affirm,            with the qualification noted further below.                        Collins  pled  guilty  at  a  plea  hearing   which            conformed  substantially to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 requirements.            He agreed  with a prosecution  version of the  evidence which            made clear that there was a factual basis for his guilty plea            and which confirmed that he  knew that he was pleading guilty            to  a crime  involving  crack  cocaine.    Consequently,  the            district   court  properly  accepted   his  guilty  plea  and            sentenced him  for conspiring  to possess  and to  distribute            crack cocaine, even  though the information charged  him only            with conspiring to possess and  to distribute "cocaine."  See                                                                      ___            United  States v.  Bush, 70  F.3d 557,  562 (10th  Cir. 1995)            ______________     ____            (rejecting  claim for  resentencing or  withdrawal of  guilty            plea  to  cocaine   base  offense  on  ground   of  ambiguous            indictment  for  conspiring  to  distribute  "cocaine  and/or            cocaine  base" where the  defendant's admissions in  his plea                                         -2-            agreement and at the plea  hearing showed his intent to plead            guilty  to  conspiring  to  distribute cocaine  base),  cert.                                                                    _____            denied, 116 S. Ct. 795 (1996).            ______                      The Anders  brief also asserted  that trial counsel                          ______            had  represented  Collins  ineffectively,  but  our   general            practice is  not to  consider such  claims on direct  appeal.            See United States v. Mala, 7 F.3d 1058, 1063 (1st Cir. 1993),            ___ _____________    ____            cert. denied,  511 U.S. 1086 (1994).  Accordingly, we dismiss            ____________            the  claim  of ineffective  assistance  without  prejudice to            Collins' right to  assert it in a  post-conviction proceeding            under 28 U.S.C.   2255.  Id.                                     ___                      We  affirm  appellant's  conviction  and  sentence,                      ___________________________________________________            without  prejudice  to  his  right to  assert  his  claim  of            _____________________________________________________________            ineffective assistance  of trial  counsel under  28 U.S.C.               _____________________________________________________________            2255.  We grant appellate counsel's motion to withdraw.            _______________________________________________________                                         -3-
