Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that thi s opinion should not * be publishe d an d is not precedent except under the limited circu mstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHE FIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 08- 30666

UN I TE D S TA TE S OF AM ERI CA P l ai n t i f f - A pp el l ee v. JOH N N I E SI M S D efen d a n t - A p p ell a n t

A p p ea lf

rom the U n i tedS tates D i stri ct C ou rt f o rt he Eas t e r n Di s t r i c to f Lo ui s i ana U SD C N o. 2: 05- C R

- 297- 3

B ef ore H IG G IN B O T H A M , SM ITH , an d S O U T H W IC K , C i rcui tJu dg es . P E R C U R IA M: * Jo hnni e Si m s pl e d guil t y t o c o ns pi r ac y t o po s s e s s c o c ai ne a nd m ar ij uana w ith in te n t to d is tr ib u te , c o n s p ir a c yt o m u r d e ra fe d e r a l a g e n t, b e in gafe lo n in po s s e s s i o n o f

a f i r e ar m , a nd p o s s e s s i o n o f af i r e ar m i n f

ur t he r anc e o f

adr ug t r af f i c ki ng c r i m e ora c r i m e of vi ol enc e. O n appeal , Si m s ar gues t hatt he fac t ual b a sis su p p o rtin gh is g u il typ lea to p o ss e ss ion of a fi re a rm infu rth e ra n ce of a dru g t raf

f i cki n g cri m e or cri m e of vi ol en ce w as inad equ ate and t h at t h e di st ri ct
c o u r te r r e di n r e f

u s i n g t o p e r m i t S i m s t o wit h d r a w h i s g u i l t yp l e a . W e AF FI RM
. United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D Aug ust14, 2009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I ClerkN o. 08- 30666

2 Asup ersedi n g i n di ct m en tcharged Sim s, C h ri s W a l ker, an d an ot h er i ndivi dua lw i t h e nga gi ng i n adr ug c o ns pi r ac y i nvo lvi ng t he p o s s e s s i o no f c o c ai ne and m ar ij ua n a w i t h i nt entt o di st r ibut e. The i ndi c t m ental so al l ege d t hat W al ke ra nd Si m s h ad con s pi r e d t o m ur de raU
. S. D r ug Enfo r c e m e nt A d m in is tr a tio n a g e n t. The fac t ualb as i s d ocum e ntw as s i gne d b y Si m s , hi s c o uns e l , a nd t he prosecutor
. I test abli shed t h at W al ke r, w h o is Sim s’ s c ou si n , w as arres t ed f or s e llin gd r u g s . S im s s p o k e w ith W a lk e rm u ltip le tim e s w h i l e W a lk e rw a s in p r is o n . T h e t w o m e n s c h e m e dto m u r d e rth e D E Aa g e n tr e s p o n s ib le fo rW a lk e r ’s arrest
. Th ey bel i eved t h at w i t h ou tt h e agen tt o t est i f y aga i n stW al ker, W al ker
w o ul d b e r e l e as e d. D E Aa gen t s d i s c o ve r e d t he pl an andc o nduc t e d as t i ng o pe r at i o n. Si m s m e tan unde r c o ve rof f i c e rand at t e m pt e d t o hi r e hi m t o kil lt he
a ge n t. O n the da y o f h i s ar rest, S i m s ga ve th e off i cer $ 1 , 0 0 0 a s a d ow n pa ym en t. Af t e r Si m s w as a r r e s t e d, al o ad e d ha ndg un a nd s m al lq uant i t i e s o f m ar ij uana a n dco c a in e w e r e fo u n din S im s ’ s v e h ic le
. S im s s p o k e w ith a u th o r itie s a fte rh is
a r r e s ta n de x p l a i n e dt h a tWa l k e rh a d b e e n h i s s o u r c e o f d r u g s a n dt h a tS i ms w as r e s po ns ibl e f

o r c o l l e c t i ng m o ne y f r o m m e m be r s o f W al ke r ’ s dr ug t r af f i c ki ng org a n i za ti on to pa y for th e m u rd er of the ag en t. S im s fir s t c o n te n d s th a t t h e fa c tu a l b a s is w a s in a d e q u a te t o s u p p o r t h is p l e a t o p o s s e s s i o n o f

a f i r e a r m i n f

u r t h e r a n c e o f

d r u gt r a f

f i c k i n gc r i me o rc r i me of vi ol en ce. “B e fore en t eri n g j u dg m en ton a gu i l t y pl ea, t h e courtm u st d e te rm in e th a t th e re is a fac tu a l ba sis forth e p lea .” F e d
. R
. C rim
. P
. 1 1 (b )(3).

“ Th e fac t ualbas i s f

ort he gui l t y pl ea m ustappeari n t he r ec or d .
. . and m ustbe suff i ci en t l y speci f

i c t o al l ow t h e court t o determ i n e t h at t h e defen da n t ’ s c on du ct
w a s w i th i n the am b i t of tha t de fi n ed as crim i n a l
. ” Unit edS tates v. Cas t r o - Tr e v i no , 464 F
. 3d536 , 540 ( 5t h Ci r . 2 00 6) (i nt e r nalq uo t at i o n m ar ks a nd
c ita tio n o m itt e d ). A n in d ic tm e n t, if s u ffic ie n t l ys p e c ific , ca n s e r v e a s th e s o le source of t h e fact u albasi s f or a gui l t y pl ea . Uni t e d St at e s v . Hi l de nbrand , 527N o. 08- 30666

3 F .3 d4 6 6 , 4 7 5 (5 th C ir .), cer t
. den i ed , 1 2 9 S . C t. 4 3 7 ( 2 0 0 8 ). If a n in d ic tm e n t is nots uf f i c i entt o s erve as t he fac t ualb as i s f ora g ui l t y pl ea, t hi s c our tm ay e xa m i ne t he e nt i r e r e c o r d t o det e r m i ne w he t he rt he r e w as a fac t ualb as i s f o rt he defenda n t ’ s pl ea . Uni t e d St at e s v . Vonn , 5 3 5 U .S

. 5 5 , 7 4 -7 6 (20 0 2 ). S i m s argues t h at t h e fact u albasi s w as i n ad equ ate because i tdi d n otshow t h a t t h e g u n f

o u n di n h i s c a rw a s u s e di n f u r t h e r a n c e o f

ad r u gt r a f

f i c k i n gc r i me o ra cr i m e of

vi o l e nc e . A f

i r e ar m i s pos s e s s e d i n f ur t he r anc e of

a dr ug t r af

f i c ki ng o ffe n s e if it “fu r th e r s , a d v a n c e s , o rh e lp s fo r w a r dth e d r u gtr a ffic k in go ffe n s e .” Un i t ed S t ate s v. Ceballos- T orre s , 218 F
. 3d 409 , 415 ( 5th C i r. 200 0 ). M ere p r e s e n c e o f a fir e a r m is n o t e n o u g h
. I d. a t 4 1 4
. T h e g ov ern m en t i s req u i red to provi de evi den ce “ speci f i c to th e parti cul ar defen da n t , show i n g t h at hi s orher p oss ess i on a ctu a l l y furth ere dth e d ru g traff i ck i n g offen se.” I

d. A nonexhaust ive l i stof fact ors t o be consi dered i n cl u des t h ese: t he t yp e o f

dr ug ac t ivit y t hati s b e i ng c o nduc t e d, ac c e s s ibil i t y o f t he f i r e ar m , t he t yp e o f

t he w e ap o n, w he t he rt he w e ap o n i s s t o l e n, t he s ta tu s o f th e p o s s e s s io n (le g itim a te o rille g a l), w h e th e rt h e g u n is l o ad e d, pr o xi m i t y t o dr ugs o rdr ug prof i t s , a nd t he t i m e a nd c i r c um s t anc e s und e rw hi c h t he g un i s f o und. I d. a t 4 1 4 -1 5
. A num ber of our pre c ede nt s hol d t hatpos se ss i on o f a f i r ear m , i ncl udi ng an u n l oad ed on e, i n cl ose proxi m i t y t o a l arge am ou n t of dru gs i s s u f f i ci en tt o show th a t a fir e a r m w a s p o s s e s s e d in fu r th e r a n c e o f a d r u g tr a ffic k in gcr im e . See, e . g. , Un i t ed S t ate s v. Nu n ez- S an chez , 4 7 8 F .3 d6 6 3 ( 5 th C ir . 2 0 0 7 ); Uni t e d S t at e s v. C h arl es , 4 69 F. 3d4 02 ( 5t h Ci r . 2 00 6)

. The e vi de nc e he r e i s t hatSi m s l e f tt he gu n i n t h e car du ri n g h i s m eet i n g w i t h the sup posed con t ractk i l l er an d d i d n ot
c ar r yi twi t h h i m . T h e r e i s n o d i r e c te v i d e n c e t h a th e e v e ru s e do rc a r r i e dt he gunw hi l e s e l l i ng dr ugs . The gu n w as fo und i n t he sa m e ca ras a sm al la m o unt of drug s t h at Si m s argues w as on l y f or persona l u se. Th e fact u albasi s does not des c r ibe t he l oc at i on o f t he gun i n r el at i on t o t he drugs orw het hert he gun w asN o. 08- 30666

4 e as i l y ac c e s s ibl e t o Si m s . I ti s f r o m t he s e gap s i n t he pr o o f t hatSi m s f

i nds t he factu a lba sis to be de fi ci en t. In consi deri n g h i s argu m en t , w e st art w i t h t h e fact t h at S im s d id not
o bje c t t o t h e fa c tu a l b a s is o f h is g u iltyp le a . H e co n c e d e s th a t o u rre v ie w is th e r e fo r e fo rp la in e r r o r . S ee Un i t ed S t ate s v. Palm er , 45 6 F
. 3 d48 4 , 49 1 ( 5 th C i r . 2006)

. Pl ai n er r orr evi ew c ons i st s of f ourel em en t s: ( 1) t her e m ustbe an e r r o r ; ( 2) t he e r r o rm us tb e c l e aro ro bv i o us ; ( 3) t he e r r o rm us ta f fe c tt he
a p p ell a n t’ s su b stan ti a lri gh ts; an d( 4 ) w h en the f i rst threer equir em ent s ar e m et,

“ t he c o ur to f

a ppe al s ha s t h e d isc ret i on t o rem edyt h e err or— di scr et i on w h i ch
ou ghtt o b e e xer c i se d onl y if t he e r r ors er i ous l y af fec t [ s] t he fai r nes s, i nt egr i ty or p u b l i c rep u tati on of j u d i ci a lpr oce ed i n gs . ” P u cket tv. Un i t ed S t ate s , 12 9 S

. C t. 1 4 2 3 , 1 4 2 9 (2 0 0 9 ) (in te r n a l q u o ta tio n m a r k s a n dcit a tio n s o m itt e d ) (e m p h a s is in o r ig in a l). T h e r e fo r e , e v e n if S im s ca n s h o w th a tt h e d is tr ic t c o u r t e r r e din
ac c e pt i ng hi s g ui l t y pl e a, he m us ts ho w t hatt he e r r o rw as pl ai n. Fora n e r r o rt o b e apl ai n o ne , i tm us tb e o bv i o us ; i ti s no te no ught hatt he
erro r is “su bj ect to rea son a b l e d i sp u te. ” I d. W e h a v e n o te d th a t “e r r o r s a r e p la in if t h e ya r e s o c o n s p ic u o u s th a t t h e tr ia l ju d g e a n dp r o s e c u to rw e r e d e r e lic t in
c o unt e nanc i ng [the m ] , e ve n absen tt h e defen da n t ’ s t i m el y assi s t anc ei n de t e c t i ng [t h em ]. ” Uni t e d St at e s v . Mal do nado , 42 F. 3d 906, 912 ( 5t h C i r . 1995) (i nt er nal quo t at i o n m ar ks a n d ci t at i o ns o m i t t e d) ( al t e r at i o ns i n o r i gi nal)

. Eve n i f t he d is tr ic t co u r t m a y h a v e e r r e d in a c c e p tin g h is g u ilty p le a , th e s h o r t c o m i n g s in t h e fac tu albasi s w ere not so c on spi cuou s t h at t h e t ri alj u dg e an d p rosec u t or w er e de r el i c ti n co unte nanci ng t hem
. W e a r e no t face d w i t h a w r i t t en fac t ual bas i s t hataff

i rm at ively di spr ove s so m e e l em entof t he o f fens e. I nst ead, w hat t he go ver nm entm i ghthave bee n abl e t o pr ove , orper haps j ust pro ve bet t er , w as ne ve rde m and e d t hr o ughade fe ns e o bj e c t i o n. Th e di st r i c tc our tdi d notpl ai nl y e r ri n ac c ept i ng Si m s’ s gui l t y pl ea.N o. 08- 30666

5 S im s a ls o c o n te n d s t h a t th e d is tr ic t c o u r t e r r e dinre fu s in gto p e r m it h im t o w i t hdraw hi s gui l t y pl ea. Si m s pl ed g ui l t y i n N ove m ber2006. I n A pril2008, he f i l e d a m o t i o n t o wi t hd r a w h i s g uil t y p l e a . Si m s a r g ue s t ha t t he c o ur tw as aw ar e o f h i s d esire t o w i t hdraw hi s pl ea i n Jul y 2007
. W i t houthol di ng a hear i ng, t he di st r i c tc our tdeni ed Si m s’ s m ot i on t o w i t hdraw hi s gui l t y pl ea. F ol l ow i n g t h e di st ri ctcourt ’ s acc eptan ce o f h i s gui l t y pl ea, Sim s di d n ot h a v e a n a b s o lu te r ig h t to w ith d r a w th a t p le a . Se eUni t e d St at e s v . St e phe ns , 489 F .3 d6 4 7 , 6 5 4 (5 th C ir . 2 0 0 7 ). T h e co u r t c o u ldh a v e a llo w e dw ith d r a w a l, h ow ever, i f

Sim s had show n t h at hi s r equ estw as sup ported by a fai r and j u st
r e a s o n . S eeF e d . R . C r im . P . 1 1 (d )(2 ). T h e d is tr ic t c o u r t h a s b r o a dd is c r e tio n in d e te r m in in g w h e th e r to p e r m it a d e fe n d a n t to w ith d r a w h is g u ilty p le a . Un i t ed S t ate s v. Carr , 740 F. 2d 339, 344 ( 5t h C i r. 1984)

. A nu m berof i l l ust r at ive fact ors are consi dered i n deter m i n in gw h e th e r a fai r and j u streason h as been
s h o w n : ( 1) w het h er or n ott he def endanthas as se r t ed hi s i nnoce nce ; ( 2) w he t he ro rno tt he g o ve r nm e ntw o ul d s uf fe rpr ej u di c e i f

t he w i t hdr awalm o t i o n wer e g r ant e d; ( 3) w he t he rornott he de fe nda nt has de l ay e d i n f

i l i ng hi s w i t hdr awalm o t i o n; ( 4) w he t he r o r no tt he w i t hdraw alw oul d s ubst ant i al l y i nco nveni enc e t he c our t ; ( 5) w h et h er ornot c l ose assi st an ce of coun selw as ava i l able; ( 6) w h et h er or not t h e ori gi n alp l ea w as k n ow i n g an d vol u n t ary; a n d ( 7) w h et h er orno t t he wi t hd r a wal wou l d was t e j ud i c i a l r e s o ur c e s ; a nd , as ap plica bl e, t h e reason w h y defenses adva n ced l aterw ere not pro f fer ed att he t i m e o f

t he or i gi nal pl eadi ng, or t he r eas ons w hy a de fe nda ntde l ay e d i n m ak i ng hi s w i t hdr awalm o t i o n. I d. at 343

- 44 (c i t ati on s om i t t ed). I f, app l yi n g t h e Carrfac t or s, “a def endanthas al l e ge d fac t s t hatw o ul d j us t i f y r e l i e f, a c o ur t m us t ho l d an e vi de nt i ar y he ar i ng on the m a tter. ” Un i t ed S t ate s v. W ash i ngt on , 4 8 0 F .3d 3 0 9 , 3 1 6 (5t h C ir. 2 0 0 7 ). S i m s’ s p ri m a ryarg u m en ts su p p ortingh i s m oti on to w i th d ra w h i s gu i l ty pl e a ar e t hathe has as s e r t e d hi s i nno c e nc e t o t he dr ug c o ns pi r ac y c har ge s a nd t h at probl em s c om m u n i cat i n gw ith hi s defen se c ou n selm ad e hi s pl eaN o. 08- 30666

6 in v o lu n ta r y . H o w e v e r , a t h is re a r r a ig n m e n t, S im s re s p o n d e da ffir m a tiv e ly
w hen he w as as ked w het herhe under st oo d t he c harges a n d w h et herhe had
c om m i t t ed t h e ac t s as c harge d. “ Sol em n dec l ar at i ons i n open c our tc ar r y a s t r o ng pr e s um pt i o n o f ve r i t y, ” and Si m s has no t o ve r c o m e t h at pr e s um pt i o n. B lackle dge v. A l l i son , 4 3 1 U .S . 6 3 , 7 4 (1 9 7 7 ). A d d itio n a lly , th o u g h S im s a n dh is
or i gi naldef

ense cou nse lhad di sa gr ee m ent s, Si m s agr ee d i n co urtt hathe had di scussed his case w i t h hi s at t orney a n d w as sat i sf i ed w i t h her servi ces. M ore ov er, w i th d ra w a lw ou l dpr ejud i ce th e g ov ern m en t, w h i ch w ou l dh a ve to p rep a re for a n ew tri a lon allf ou r cou n ts, i n cl u d i n g th e on e for con sp i ra cyto
com m i tm u rder, a n d S i m s d el ayed fil i n g h i s m ot i on to w i t h draw hi s gui l t y pl ea f o re i ght e e n m o nt hs
. The di s t r i c t c o ur t di d no t ab us e i t s di s c r e t i o n i n de nyi ng Si m s’ s m ot i on t o w i t hdraw hi s gui l t y pl ea w i t houtpr ovi di ng a hear i ng. T h e d i s t r i c tc o u r t ’ s j u d g me n ti s A F F I RMED.