United States v. Freddie Andaya

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-4640
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
FREDDIE ANDAYA, a/k/a Bigotes, a/k/a Old Man, a/k/a Raymond
Garcia,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney,
Chief District Judge. (3:12-cr-00030-FDW-1)
Submitted: May 26, 2015 Decided: June 19, 2015
Before WILKINSON and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robert C. Carpenter, ADAMS, HENDON, CARSON, CROW & SAENGER,
P.A., Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellant. Jill
Westmoreland Rose, Acting United States Attorney, Amy E. Ray,
Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Freddie Andaya pled guilty to conspiracy to possess with
intent to distribute cocaine, conspiracy to commit money
laundering, and use of a firearm during and in relation to a
drug trafficking offense. He appeals his convictions, asserting
that the district court abused its discretion by denying his
motion to withdraw his guilty plea. We find no abuse of
discretion and therefore affirm Andaya’s convictions.
“A defendant has no absolute right to withdraw a guilty
plea.” United States v. Bowman, 348 F.3d 408, 413 (4th Cir.
2003) (internal quotation marks omitted). Rather, once the
district court has accepted a guilty plea, it is within the
court’s discretion whether to grant a motion to withdraw it
based on the defendant’s showing of a “fair and just reason.”
Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(d)(2)(B); United States v. Battle, 499 F.3d
315, 319 (4th Cir. 2007).
When considering whether to allow a defendant to withdraw a
guilty plea, the trial court must consider six factors:
(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 defendant has had
close assistance of competent counsel, (5) whether
withdrawal will cause prejudice to the government, and
(6) whether it will inconvenience the court and waste
judicial resources.
2
United States v. Moore, 931 F.2d 245, 248 (4th Cir. 1991)
Although all of the Moore factors should be considered, the
first, second, and fourth are the most important factors in
making the determination of whether to allow withdrawal of the
plea. United States v. Sparks, 67 F.3d 1145, 1154 (4th Cir.
1995).
We have reviewed the record on appeal and the parties’
arguments, and we conclude that the district court did not
clearly err in determining that Andaya’s plea was knowingly and
voluntarily entered, that he had the close assistance of
competent counsel, and that he failed to make a credible showing
of legal innocence.
We conclude that the district court properly weighed
the Moore factors and did not abuse its discretion in denying
Andaya’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea. See United
States v. Ubakanma, 215 F.3d 421, 424 (4th Cir. 2000).
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s denial of the motion
to withdraw the plea and affirm Andaya’s convictions. We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
3