USA v. Antonio Guzman

Filing 920101220

Opinion

Download PDF
Case: 10-10156 Document: 00511325248 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/17/2010 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED N o . 10-10156 S u m m a r y Calendar December 17, 2010 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk U N IT E D STATES OF AMERICA, P la in t if f -A p p e lle e v. A N T O N I O M. GUZMAN, also known as Compadre, D e fe n d a n t -A p p e lla n t A p p e a l from the United States District Court fo r the Northern District of Texas U S D C No. 3:08-CR-229-1 B e fo r e REAVLEY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. P E R CURIAM:* A n t o n io M. Guzman pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with the intent t o distribute and distribution of cocaine and was sentenced to 235 months of im p r is o n m e n t and five years of supervised release. He argues on appeal that the d is t r ic t court abused its discretion in denying his motion to withdraw his guilty p le a . He contends that he was entitled to have his plea withdrawn because his p le a was unknowing and involuntary as he was being sentenced on information Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. * Case: 10-10156 Document: 00511325248 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/17/2010 No. 10-10156 t h a t was not contained within the indictment and that was not seized within the t im e period of the conspiracy as defined by the indictment. W h e n determining whether to allow a defendant to withdraw his guilty p le a , the district court should consider whether: (1) the defendant has asserted h is innocence; (2) withdrawal would prejudice the Government; (3) the defendant h a s delayed in filing his withdrawal motion; (4) withdrawal would substantially in c o n v e n ie n c e the court; (5) close assistance of counsel was available; (6) the o r ig in a l plea was knowing and voluntary; and (7) withdrawal would waste ju d ic ia l resources. United States v. Carr, 740 F.2d 339, 343-44 (5th Cir. 1984). Guzman has not shown that the district court abused its discretion in d e t e r m in in g that he was not entitled under the Carr factors to have his guilty p le a withdrawn. See id. Furthermore, because Guzman's guilty plea was k n o w in g and voluntary, the appeal waiver therein that the Government seeks t o invoke bars Guzman's claim on appeal that his sentence is unreasonable. A F F IR M E D . 2

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?