United States v. Antonio Pierce, 403 F. App'x 988

Pierce pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute crack cocaine and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime.
District court sentenced Pierce to 144 months for the drug conviction and 60 months consecutive for the firearms conviction.
Pierce appeals the § 924(c) five-year minimum as applied with the “except” clause.
Supreme Court decided Abbott v. United States after certiorari was granted, rejecting Pierce’s interpretation of § 924(c).
Pierce also challenges counsel’s effectiveness, arguing failure to raise issues prejudiced his defense.
Court affirms, holding the consecutive sentence proper and denying ineffective-assistance claim.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether § 924(c) minimum applies despite a higher minimum elsewhere	Pierce argues the ten-year minimum on the drug count exempts him.	Pierce contends the higher minimum bars further § 924(c) punishment.	Abbott controls; § 924(c) consecutive minimum stands.
Effectiveness of counsel on failing to raise issue	Ineffective assistance for not challenging § 924(c) interpretation.	No prejudice; meritless underlying claim.	No ineffective assistance; failure to raise meritless claim not prejudicial.

Abbott v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 18 (2010) (definitively rejects Pierce’s § 924(c) interpretation)
United States v. Wunder, 919 F.2d 34 (6th Cir. 1990) (exception to avoid meritless ineffective-assistance review)
McQueen v. Scroggy, 99 F.3d 1302 (6th Cir. 1996) (counsel not ineffective for failing to raise meritless arguments)
Ludwig v. United States, 162 F.3d 456 (6th Cir. 1998) (counsel not required to raise meritless arguments)
United States v. Sanders, 404 F.3d 980 (6th Cir. 2005) (on direct appeal, not all ineffective-assistance claims are reviewable)