United States Sixth Circuit

Denial of defendant-epidemiologist's motion to withdraw his guilty plea to manufacturing and possessing with intent to manufacture in excess of one hundred marijuana plants is affirmed over his claim that he was not aware that his farm itself was at risk of being forfeited because his plea agreement did not contain any language permitting the government to take the farm if he did not come up with forfeiture money.

Appellate Information

• Decided 11/29/2006
• Published 11/29/2006

Judges

• Before: CLAY and SUTTON, Circuit Judges;  SHARP, District Judge.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Peter J. Strianse, Tune, Entrekin & White, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellant.  Jimmie Lynn Ramsaur, Assistant United States Attorney, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellee.   ON BRIEF:  Peter J. Strianse, Tune, Entrekin & White, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellant.   Jimmie Lynn Ramsaur, Assistant United States Attorney, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellee.