[DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 2- 10 33 2 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 1 :1 1- cr-0 00 11 -WS-M-1

UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, Pl ai nt iff - App el le e, ve rs us PEDRO PEREZ-HERNANDEZ, Defen da nt- App el la nt .

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt forth e So ut he rnDis tri ctof Al ab am a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Sep te m be r 21 , 20 12 ) Befo re HULL, MARTIN an d KRAVITC H, Circ ui t J ud ge s. PER CURI AM: Ped ro Pere z-Herna nd ez ap pe al s fr om th e d is tri ctco urt’s o rd er d en y in g h is Case: 12-10332 Date Filed: 09/21/2012 Page: 1 of 6m ot io n t o wi th dr aw hi s g ui lt y pl ea. Bec au se we co nc lu de th atth e d is tri ctco urt di d n otab us e it s d is cret io n i n d en y in g t he m ot io n, we af firm . I. Pere z-Herna nd ez was in di ct edin Jan ua ry 20 11 forbe in g afel on in po ss es si on of afir earm , in vi ol at io n o f 18 U.S.C. § 9 22 (g ). In J un e 2 01 1, h e en te reda gu il ty ple a p ur su an t t o awrit te n p le a ag reem en t. At h is pl ea h eari ng , th e di st ric t co urt co nduc te d aRu le 11 co ll oq uy andask edPere z-Hernand ez wh ethe r he ful ly und ers to odth e ch arg es ag ai ns t h im . Perez -Hern an de z st at edth athe di d. He al so ackno wled ge d t ha t h e was ful ly sati sf ie d wi th hi s co un se l’s re pr es en ta ti on , an d t ha t h e h addi sc us se d t he fact s s urro un di ng th e ch arg e wit h c ou ns el . He st at ed th athe readan d re vi ewedhi s p le a ag reem en t wi th hi s co un se l an d t ha t h e fu ll y un de rs to odit s t erm s an d c on di ti on s, as well as h is po te nt ia l s en te nc e. He ag reed th athe co m

m it te d t he act s co m

pr is in g h is ch arg e an d c on firm edth atno on e h ad co erce d h im

in to pl ead in g g ui lt y . InOcto be r 20 11 , two da y s b efo re h is sen te nc in g h eari ng , Perez -Hern an de z fil eda pr o s em ot io n s eek in g d is m is sa l o f hi s co un se l, co nt en di ng th athi s co un se l co erce d h im

in to pl ead in g g ui lt y

de sp it e h is in no cen ce. He d idno t atth is ti m e m ov e to withdraw h is gu il ty ple a. At a h eari ng onth e m at te r, Pere z-Herna nd ez’s co un se l m ov edto withd raw, an d t he di st ric t co urt g ran te d t he m ot io n. Th e co urt 2 Case: 12-10332 Date Filed: 09/21/2012 Page: 2 of 6ap po in te d ane w att orne y to rep res en t Pe rez- Hern an de z an d re se t t he sen te nc in g he ari ng . On No ve m

be r 28 , 20 11 — fi ve m on th s af te r he en te redhi s g ui lt y

pl ea — Pere z-Herna nd ez, thr ou gh co un se l, m ov edto wit hd raw h is pl ea. He co nt en de d th at , du e to in effe ct iv e as si st an ce o f hi s o rig in al co un se l, h e d idno t u nd ers ta ndhi s pl ea an d h e act edun de r du res s. Th e d is tri ctco urt fo un d t ha t t he se arg um en ts were in su ffi ci en t t o s at is fy

Pere z-Herna nd ez’s b ur de n u nd er Fe de ral Ru le of C riminal Pro cedur e 1 1( d) (2 )(B) an d o rd eredPere z-Hernand ez t o s up pl em en t h is m ot io n. Sp eci fic al ly, th e co urt i ns tru ct edPere z-Hernand ez t o e xp la in ho w hi s o rig in al co un se l was in effe ct iv e an d wh y he an swe redth e co urt’s Ru le 11 co ll oq uy qu es ti on s fa ls el y . Co un se l fo r Pere z-Herna nd ez s up pl em en te d t he m ot io n a s t he co urt reque st ed . Cou ns el no te d t ha t Pe rez- Hern an de z co nt in ue d t o fi le pr o s e m ot io ns , wit ho utno ti fy in g c ou ns el , rei te rat in g h is arg um en t t ha t h e was co erce d b y hi s or ig in al co un se l i nt o p le ad in g g ui lt y . Cou ns el st at edth atPere z-Hernand ez was

“ co nf us edan d s care d t o g o a ga in sthi s p rio r at to rn ey ’s adv ic e,” an d t ha t h e

“ co m pl ai ns of v ery li m it edti m e with t he pri oratt orne y .” Not in g t ha t Pe rezHern an de z p ro vi de d o nl y va gu e al le ga ti on s o f co erci on an d d efi ci en t rep res en ta ti on , th e d is tri ctco urt d en ie d t he m ot io n. Th is is Pere z-Herna nd ez’s 3 Case: 12-10332 Date Filed: 09/21/2012 Page: 3 of 6ap pe al . 1 II.

W e rev ie w a di st ric t co urt’s d en ia l o f a req ue stto withd raw a g ui lt y pl ea fo r anab us e o f di sc ret io n. Uni te d Sta te s v. Fr ei xa s , 33 2 F .3d13 14 , 13 16 (11 thCir . 20 03 ). “ W e wil l re ve rs e a d is tri ctco urt’s d eci si on ona m ot io n t o wi th dr aw on ly if itis arb it rary or u nr eas on ab le .” Uni te d Sta te s v. N aj ja r , 28 3 F .3d13 06 , 13 07 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 2) . III. Fed eral Ru le of C riminal Pro cedur e 1 1( d) pro vi de s t ha t a d efen da ntm ay wit hd raw a g ui lt y

pl ea “ aft er the co urt ac cep ts th e p le a, bu t b efo re i t i m po se s se nt en ce [s ic ] if the de fen da ntcansh ow a f ai r an d ju streas onforreque st in g t he wit hd rawal .” Fed . R. Cri m . P. 11 (d )(2 )(B) . In d et erm in in g wh ethe r a d efen da nt ha s m etth is bu rd en , a di st ric t co urt “ m ay co ns id er the to ta li ty of th e ci rcu m st an ces su rro un di ng th e p le a,” i nc lu di ng “ (1 ) whe th er cl os e as si st an ce o f co un se l was av ai labl e; (2) whet he r th e p le a was kn owi ng an d v ol un ta ry ; (3 ) whe th er jud ic ia l res ou rces wou ldbe co ns erv ed ; an d (4 ) whe th er the go ve rn m en t wo ul d b e pr ejud ic edif the de fen da ntwere al lo wedto withd raw h is pl ea.” Uni te d Sta te s v. To the extent Perez-Her

nandez asser

ts an independe nt claim for inef fec tive assistance of 1 counsel duringhis guilty

plea, we decline to c onsider it beca use the re cord is insuffic iently develope d. See U

nited States v. Patterson , 595 F.3d 1324, 1328 ( 11th Cir. 2010). 4 Case: 12-10332 Date Filed: 09/21/2012 Page: 4 of 6Buc kl es , 84 3 F .2d46 9, 4 71 -7 2 (1 1t h C ir. 1 98 8) (in te rn al cit at io n o m it te d) . “ The

go odfai th , cred ib il it y

an d wei gh t o f a d efen dant ’s ass ert io ns in supp ort o f a m ot io n [t o wi th dr aw a g ui lt y pl ea] are i ss ue s fo r th e tr ia l co urt t o d eci de .” Id. at 47 2. An d “ [t]he lo ng er the de lay be twee n t he en try of the pl ea an d t he m ot io n t o wit hd raw i t, the m or e subs ta nt ia l t he reas on s m us t b e as to why th e d efen da nt se ek s wi th dr awal .” Id. at 4 73 . Here, t he di st ric t co urt d idno t ab us e it s d is cret io n i n d en y in g P erez Hern an de z’s m ot io n t o wi th dr aw hi s g ui lt y pl ea. Im po rta nt ly, Pere z-Herna nd ez wait edfiv e m on th s af

te r pl ead in g g ui lt y

to m ov e to wit hd raw h is pl ea an d d idno t rai se itwhen he fil edhi s m ot io n t o re m ov e co un se l. Whenhe lat er s ou gh t t o wit hd raw h is pl ea, i ns te adof p ro vi di ng subs ta nt ia l re as on s fo r hi s n eedto do so , Pere z-Herna nd ez o ffer edco nc lu so ry all eg at io ns ab ou t h is ori gi na l co un se l’s de fic ie nc y . Perez -Hern an de z d idno t cl ari fy ho w hi s co un se l was co erci ve or ot he rwis e d efi ci en t. An d, al th ou gh he st at edth athe was c on fu se d a ndafra id , he di d n otde sc rib e th e n atur e o f hi s co nf us io n o r th e so ur ce o f hi s fe ar. Fu rth er, Per ez-He rn an de z n ev er ex pl ai ne d wh y he tes ti fie d, u ne qu iv oc al ly, th athe un de rs to odth e n atur e o f th e ch arg e ag ai ns t h im , th athe ag reedwit h t he go ve rn m en t’s fa ctua l p ro ffer , andth athe rece iv edad equa te co un se l. We gen eral ly pr es um e th atst at em en ts m ad e ata pl ea co ll oq uy are tru e. Uni te d Sta te s v. 5 Case: 12-10332 Date Filed: 09/21/2012 Page: 5 of 6Medlo ck , 12 F.3d18 5, 1 87 (11 th Cir . 19 94 ). In l ig htof t he se st at em en ts , whi ch

Pere z-Herna nd ez h as no t co nt rad ic te d wi th an y sp eci fic it y , th e d is tri ctco urt reas on ab ly fou ndth atPere z-Herna nd ez’s g ui lt y pl ea was m ad e kno win gl y , vo lu nt ari ly, an d wi th clo se ass is ta nc e o f co un se l. Se e Buc kl es , 84 3 F .2dat 4 71 -7 2. The di st ric t co urt al so reas on ab ly det erm in edth atit s d eci si on wou ldco ns erv e jud ic ia l re so ur ces an d a vo idun du e p reju di ce t o t he go ve rn m en t: if t he co urt gr an te d t he m ot io n, the co urt an d t he go ve rn m en t wo ul d h av e to pre pa re fo r tr ia l se ve ral m on th s af

te r Pere z-Herna nd ez’s ca se was re m ov edfro m th e tr ia l d oc ke t. Se e id. Bec au se th e d is tri ctco urt re as on ab ly con si de redth e to ta li ty of th e ci rcu m st an ces , we affi rm th e d is tri ctco urt’s d en ia l o f Pere z-Hernand ez’s m ot io n to withd raw h is gu il ty ple a. AFFIRMED.

6 Case: 12-10332 Date Filed: 09/21/2012 Page: 6 of 6