Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-92-05044/USCOURTS-ca10-92-05044-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
United States of America
Appellee
Joe A. Wilburn
Appellant

Document Text:

.. 

. F8J~~J1ppeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United Tenth Circuit 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT NOV 171992 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v. 

JOE A. WILBURN, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

No. 92-5044 

(D.C. No. 90-CR-87-002-E) 

(Northern District of Oklahoma) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT1 

Before McKAY, Chief Judge, LAY, Senior Circuit Judge,2 and BALDOCK, 

Circuit Judge. 

Joe A. Wilburn was charged and convicted of conspiracy to 

defraud various manufacturers in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 by 

fraudulently redeeming coupons. The indictment alleges that the 

conspirators planned to have the Nielson Clearing House send 

checks, as payment for the misredeemed coupons, 3 to co-defendant 

Fred G. Latham's Tulsa, Oklahoma grocery store by United States 

mail. Defendant Wilburn was alleged to have assisted Latham submit 

the misredeemed coupons. In exchange for a dismissal of the 

1

This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except 

for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, 

res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

2

Honorable Donald P. Lay, Senior Circuit Judge for the United 

States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, sitting by 

designation. 

3

Misredeemed coupons as defined in the superseding indictment 

are coupons for which no corresponding consumer sale of a 

manufacturer's product existed. 

-1-

Appellate Case: 92-5044 Document: 010110148690 Date Filed: 11/17/1992 Page: 1 
... 

remaining charges, Wilburn entered a plea of guilty to Count One of 

the indictment, which alleges conspiracy to commit mail fraud. He 

pleaded guilty on February 27, 1991. On February 3, 1992, Wilburn 

filed a motion to withdraw his plea of guilty. He asserted that he 

was not guilty of the offense charged and that the Government had 

induced his plea by representing it could prove that the coupons 

had been mailed when, in fact, the Government did not have evidence 

that the mails were used. 

The district court heard arguments and denied the motion for 

leave to withdraw the · guilty plea pursuant to Federal Rule of 

Criminal Procedure 32(d) . 4 The district court found that Wilburn 

entered a knowing and voluntary guilty plea. The record with the 

plea hearing supports that finding. The district court found that 

Wilburn "had full understanding of what he was pleading to and it 

is not essential that he knew or believed as to the mailing, so 

long as that conspiracy existed and Mr. Latham and others knew and 

believed that the mailings would take place, and as a matter of 

fact, Mr. Latham has testified 50 additional mailings did take 

place." 

4

Rule 32(d) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 

provides: 

(d) Plea Withdrawal. If a motion for withdrawal of 

a plea of guilty or nolo contendere is made before 

sentence is imposed, the court may permit withdrawal of 

the plea upon a showing by the defendant of any fair and 

just reason. 

-2-

Appellate Case: 92-5044 Document: 010110148690 Date Filed: 11/17/1992 Page: 2 
Our review of the record demonstrates that there was no abuse 

of discretion in the district court's denial of leave to withdraw 

the guilty plea. Wilburn cites "newly discovered evidence" 

relating to the Government's ability to prove the mailings. This 

evidence concerns a tape recorded conversation with C.C. Melendez, 

a Nielson Clearing House employee, who stated that all the checks 

listed in Counts Two through Thirteen were sent to Latham via 

Federal Express. Wilburn in essence urges that this information 

was not fully disclosed by the Government and that it was 

unavailable to him at the time he entered his plea. The evidence 

is quite clear that Wilburn and his counsel knew of the tape 

recording at the time he decided to enter a plea of guilty. Its 

presence and availability were discussed and described on the 

record in Wilburn's presence. Under the circumstances, we find 

that there was no newly discovered evidence to support Wilburn's 

motion to withdraw the plea. There is no evidence that the 

Government misrepresented any facts to defendant's counsel. The 

law is well settled that in a mail fraud conspiracy case the 

prosecution need only show intent to use the mail or that such use 

was reasonably foreseeable. See United States v. Dray, 901 F.2d 

1132, 1137 {1st Cir.), cert. denied, 111 S. ct. 245 (1990); United 

States v. Reed, 721 F.2d 1059, 1060-61 {6th Cir. 1983). In 

addition, there was evidence that Latham received coupon payment 

checks through the mail from other manufacturers during the time 

frame of the conspiracy. 

-3-

Appellate Case: 92-5044 Document: 010110148690 Date Filed: 11/17/1992 Page: 3 
'! -

Under the circumstances, we find that the district court did 

not abuse its discretion in refusing Wilburn's motion to withdraw 

his guilty plea. 

The order of the district court is affirmed. 

-4-

Entered for the Court 

Donald P. Lay 

Senior Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 92-5044 Document: 010110148690 Date Filed: 11/17/1992 Page: 4