Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sammy L. ANDERSON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-03-19
Citations: 30 F. App'x 280
Docket Number: No. 01-4552
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sammy L. ANDERSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 30
Pages: 280–281

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sammy L. ANDERSON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 01-4552.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted March 1, 2002.
Decided March 19, 2002.
Beattie B. Ashmore, Price, Paschal & Ashmore, P.A., Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellant. J. Strom Thurmond, Jr., United States Attorney, Isaac Johnson, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
OPINION
PER CURIAM.
Sammy L. Anderson appeals the district court's denial of his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. Anderson pleaded guilty to one count of possession with intent to distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C.A. § 841(a)(1) (West 1999 & Supp. 2001). He claims the district court failed to establish an adequate factual basis for his plea and erred in failing to allow him to later withdraw his plea.
We review a district court's acceptance of a guilty plea as supported by a sufficient factual basis only for abuse of discretion. United States v. Mitchell, 104 F.3d 649, 652 (4th Cir.1997). Likewise, we review a district court's denial of a motion to withdraw a guilty plea for abuse of discretion. United States v. Craig, 985 F.2d 175, 178 (4th Cir.1993). Upon examination of the record, we find the district court heard sufficient information to prove every element of the offense, and thus established an adequate factual basis for Anderson's guilty plea. Moreover, because Anderson presented no credible evidence supporting his claims that his plea was coerced and that he is innocent, the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying his request to withdraw his plea. See United States v. Moore, 931 F.2d 245, 248 (4th Cir.1991).
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. We dispense with oral argument, because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.