United States v. George

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
December 18, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-10570
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
HERMAN GEORGE,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:02-CR-48-ALL
--------------------
Before BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Herman George appeals his guilty-plea conviction and
sentence for possession of firearms by an armed career criminal.
See 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(e). George argues that the
district court abused its discretion in denying the Assistant
Federal Public Defender Chris A. Cooklin’s first motion to
withdraw as appointed counsel. A valid guilty plea waives any
nonjurisdictional defects leading to a conviction United States

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 03-10570
-2-
v. Owens, 996 F.2d 59, 60 (5th Cir. 1993). The issue of the
district court’s denial of appointed counsel’s motion to withdraw
involves a purported nonjurisdictional defect waived by George’s
valid guilty plea. See id.
George also argues that the district court erred in denying
his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. A district court may
grant a motion to withdraw a guilty plea before a defendant is
sentenced upon a showing by the defendant of “a fair and just
reason for requesting the withdrawal.” FED. R. CRIM. P.
11(d)(2)(B)(2003); United States v. Brewster, 137 F.3d 853, 857
(5th Cir. 1998) (citing former FED. R. CRIM. P. 32(e)); see also
United States v. Carr, 740 F.2d 339, 343-44 (5th Cir. 1984). The
district court did not abuse its discretion in denying George’s
motion to withdraw his guilty plea. See Brewster, 137 F.3d at
857-58.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --