The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
01-60203•United States v. Esteban
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be
published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-60203
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
EVERETT NAPOLEAN ESTEBAN,
Defendant-
Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Mississippi
USDC No. 3:00-CR-138-1-BN
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
November 8, 2001
Before DAVIS, BENAVIDES and STEWART, Circuit Judges:
PER CURIAM:*
Everett Napolean Esteban appeals his guilty plea conviction for conspiracy to distribute 500
grams or more of methamphetamine. He argues that the district court abused its discretion in denying
his motion to withdraw his guilty plea.
The district court may grant a motion to withdraw a guilty plea before a defendant is
sentenced if the defendant shows “any fair and just reason.” Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(e). This court
reviews the denial of a Rule 32(e) motion for abuse of discretion. See United States v. Grant, 117
F.3d 788, 789 (5th Cir. 1997).
-- 1 of 2 --
While under oath at the rearraignment hearing, Esteban admitted his guilt and indicated that
he was entering his guilty plea voluntarily and free from threats or coercion. Esteban subsequently
admitted his guilt during interviews with the probation officer and federal prosecutor and offered no
evidence that he had expressed any reservation about his guilty plea at either interview. Given the
district court’s finding that Esteban’s testimony at the motion hearing lacked credibility in light of his
frequent and convenient lapses of memory as to relevant questions, we hold that the district court did
not abuse its discretion in denying Esteban’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea. Accordingly, the
judgment of conviction is AFFIRMED.
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.