US v. Garcia
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus CIRO GAMALIEL GARCIA, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Lynchburg. Norman K. Moon, District Judge. (6:05-cr-00006-NKM)
April 9, 2007
May 3, 2007
Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Thomas E. Wray, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellant. John L. Brownlee, United States Attorney, Edward A. Lustig, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Ciro distribute Gamaliel Garcia 28 pled U.S.C. guilty § 846 to conspiracy and to was
sentenced to 300 months in prison.
He now appeals, claiming that
the district court should have allowed him to withdraw his guilty plea because he allegedly did not understand the plea agreement. We affirm.
I. Our review is for abuse of discretion. States v. Ubakanma, 215 F.3d 421, 424 (4th Cir. 2000). of a guilty plea is not a matter of right. Id. See United Withdrawal
bears the burden of showing a "fair and just reason" for the withdrawal of his plea. Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(d)(2)(B). "[A] `fair
and just' reason . . . is one that essentially challenges . . . the fairness of the Rule 11 proceeding." United States v. Lambey, 974 An appropriately
F.2d 1389, 1394 (4th Cir. 1992) (en banc).
conducted Rule 11 proceeding, however, raises a strong presumption that the guilty plea is final and binding. Courts consider six factors in Id. determining whether
withdrawal of a guilty plea is proper: (1) whether the defendant has offered credible evidence that his plea was not knowing or otherwise involuntary; (2) whether the defendant has credibly asserted his legal innocence; (3) whether there has been a delay between entry of the plea and filing of the motion; (4) whether the defendant has had close assistance of counsel; (5) - 2 -
whether withdrawal will cause prejudice to the government; and (6) whether withdrawal will inconvenience the court and waste judicial resources. Ubakanma, 215 F.3d at 424 (quoting United States v. Moore, 931 F.2d 245, 248 (4th Cir. 1991)(footnote omitted)). With these factors in mind, we have reviewed the record and the parties' briefs on appeal. We conclude that Garcia did not
demonstrate a "fair and just" reason for withdrawing his guilty plea, and that there was no abuse of discretion.
II. Accordingly, we affirm Garcia's conviction. We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
- 3 -
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?