UNITED STATES v. WILSON (2019)

[Unpublished]

Terrance Wilson appeals the district court’s ¹ denial of his request to withdraw his plea and proceed to trial after he pleaded guilty to drug and firearm offenses. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief arguing that the district court erred by refusing to allow Wilson to withdraw his plea. Wilson has filed a motion for appointment of new counsel.

Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to allow Wilson to withdraw his plea, as the plea hearing transcripts show that Wilson understood the plea agreement, and knowingly and voluntarily entered into the agreement, despite his later statements at sentencing asserting that he had not fully understood his plea agreement and that he had been misled by his attorneys. See United States v. Green, 521 F.3d 929, 931 (8th Cir. 2008) (standard of review); United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 890-91 (8th Cir. 2003); Nguyen v. United States, 114 F.3d 699, 703 (8th Cir. 1997).

We have also independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), and we have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment, grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and deny Wilson’s motion for counsel.

FOOTNOTES

1.   The Honorable Catherine D. Perry, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri.

PER CURIAM.