Opinion ID: 1238393
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: New Fact

Text: Lastly, Showalter mentions a new fact, which appears to be related to his changed circumstances argument. He asserts that, after he pleaded guilty, the properties that he represented would be improved were developed and sold, reducing the amount of the previously anticipated loss. He characterizes this as a material change in circumstances. The government addresses this argument accurately: [Showalter] is mistaken, however, that this `new fact' constitutes a material change in circumstances. [Showalter] was charged with and pled guilty to wire fraud for misappropriating investors' money. That properties he used to lure people to `invest' their money in High Park Investments may have sold is in no way connected to whether [Showalter] defrauded investors and whether he intended to defraud them. Even if Showalter were correct in asserting that the loss amount turned out to be less than it was anticipated to be, the only possible impact from that would be to decrease the applicable Guideline range, and potentially lessen his sentence. But, a defendant may not withdraw a guilty plea because his sentence may be different from that which was originally anticipated. See Nostratis, 321 F.3d at 1211. The district court adequately considered and correctly resolved all of Showalter's arguments pertaining to his motion to withdraw his guilty plea.