US v. Adrian Parker

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:10-cr-00087-FDW-4 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999192763].. [13-4057]

Appeal: 13-4057

Doc: 38

Filed: 09/13/2013

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-4057

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
ADRIAN PARKER, a/k/a Great One, a/k/a Rock,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.
Frank D. Whitney,
Chief District Judge. (3:10-cr-00087-FDW-4)

Submitted:

September 10, 2013

Decided:

September 13, 2013

Before DUNCAN, SHEDD, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Haakon Thorsen, THORSEN LAW OFFICES, Charlotte, North Carolina,
for Appellant.
Anne M. Tompkins, United States Attorney,
William M. Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte,
North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 13-4057

Doc: 38

Filed: 09/13/2013

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Adrian Parker pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess
with

intent

to

distribute

U.S.C. § 846 (2006).

cocaine

base,

in

violation

of

21

Prior to the sentencing, Parker sought to

withdraw his guilty plea based on a change in the law announced
by this court in United States v. Simmons, 649 F.3d 237 (4th
Cir.

2011)

(en

banc),

which

reduced

the

minimum applicable to Parker’s conviction.
denied

Parker’s

motion.

The

court

statutory

The district court

sentenced

months of imprisonment and he now appeals.

mandatory

Parker

to

210

Finding no error, we

affirm.
On
abused

its

appeal,
discretion

guilty plea. *
withdraw

a

Parker
in

argues

denying

that

his

the

motion

district
to

withdraw

to

his

We review a district court’s denial of a motion to
guilty

plea

for

abuse

of

discretion.

States v. Dyess, 478 F.3d 224, 237 (4th Cir. 2007).
seeking

court

withdraw

his

guilty

plea

bears

the

United

A defendant
burden

of

demonstrating “‘a fair and just reason’” for withdrawal of his
plea.

United States v. Faris, 388 F.3d 452, 456 (4th Cir. 2004)

(citing Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(d)(2)(B)).
*

In deciding whether to

Parker also argues that the waiver of appellate rights
contained in the plea agreement should not foreclose his appeal.
The Government, however, has not sought enforcement of the
appellate waiver so we decline to consider whether Parker’s
appeal would be foreclosed by the waiver.

2

Appeal: 13-4057

Doc: 38

Filed: 09/13/2013

Pg: 3 of 3

permit a defendant to withdraw his guilty plea, a district court
should consider:
(1)
whether
the
defendant
has
offered
credible
evidence that his plea was not knowing or not
voluntary; (2) whether the defendant has credibly
asserted his legal innocence; (3) whether there has
been a delay between the entering of the plea and the
filing of the motion; (4) whether the defendant has
had close assistance of competent counsel; (5) whether
withdrawal will cause prejudice to the government; and
(6) whether withdrawal will inconvenience the court
and waste judicial resources.
Faris, 388 F.3d at 456 (citations omitted).
We

have

thoroughly

reviewed

the

record

and

the

relevant legal authorities and conclude that the district court
did not abuse its discretion.

The court properly considered the

above-listed factors and did not err in denying Parker’s motion
to withdraw his guilty plea.
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district
court.
legal

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
contentions

are

adequately

presented

in

the

materials

before this court and argument would not aid in the decisional
process.

AFFIRMED

3