Case ID: f-appx_514/html/0491-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose Ramiro VICHARELLY, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 12-50197
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Feb. 22, 2013.
    Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Michael S. Truesdale, Esq., Austin, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
    
      Before HIGGINBOTHAM, OWEN, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Jose Ramiro Vicharelly appeals his convictions of conspiracy to commit visa fraud and conspiracy to encourage aliens to illegally enter and reside in the United States. Vicharelly argues that the district court erred by denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea.

A defendant does not have an absolute right to withdraw a guilty plea but, rather, bears the burden of showing that “a fair and just reason” warrants the withdrawal. United States v. Powell, 354 F.3d 362, 370 (5th Cir.2003). We review the denial of a motion to withdraw for an abuse of discretion. Id. In light of the record evidence, the parties’ arguments, and the relevant, non-exclusive factors originally set forth in United States v. Carr, 740 F.2d 339, 343-44 (5th Cir.1984), we conclude that Vichar-elly, who admitted to detailed facts of his guilt while under oath over four months before he filed the motion to withdraw, fails to show an abuse of discretion by the district court. See Powell, 354 F.3d at 370; United States v. Lampazianie, 251 F.3d 519, 524-25 (5th Cir.2001).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.