UNITED STATES v. REYNA SEGOVIA (1997)

 The Government charged Miguel Angel Reyna-Segovia with conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846 (1994).   Reyna-Segovia initially pleaded guilty to the charge, but then, against the repeated advice of counsel, moved to withdraw his plea.   The district court found Reyna-Segovia met his burden on the factors warranting withdrawal, and granted the motion.   See United States v. Prior, 107 F.3d 654, 657 (8th Cir.1997), petition for cert. filed, No. 96-8478 (U.S. Apr.3, 1997).   At trial, co-conspirators testified about their drug activity with Reyna-Segovia.   Based on this testimony, the jury convicted Reyna-Segovia and at sentencing the district court attributed more methamphetamine to him than the plea agreement had.   Having lost his gamble with the jury and having received a longer sentence, Reyna-Segovia contends on appeal the district court should have denied his motion to withdraw his plea.   According to Reyna-Segovia, the district court should have disbelieved him at the withdrawal hearing and should have warned him a jury would likely convict him.   We disagree.   Reyna-Segovia received the withdrawal he sought, and now must accept the consequences of his request.   Cf. United States v. Owens, 902 F.2d 1154, 1157 (4th Cir.1990).   More appropriately, Reyna-Segovia challenges his jury conviction on several grounds.   We reject them all.   Given the overwhelming evidence against Reyna-Segovia, a reasonable jury could easily find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.   See United States v. McMurray, 34 F.3d 1405, 1412 (8th Cir.1994).   Because the Government's use of a paid informant was permissible, see United States v. King, 803 F.2d 387, 390-91 (8th Cir.1986) (per curiam), the prosecutor did not commit misconduct at Reyna-Segovia's trial.   See United States v. Flores-Mireles, 112 F.3d 337, 341 (8th Cir.1997).   Lastly, Reyna-Segovia should raise his claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel collaterally rather than on direct appeal.   See United States v. Kenyon, 7 F.3d 783, 785 (8th Cir.1993).   We thus affirm Reyna-Segovia's conviction.

PER CURIAM.