UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-5059
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JESUS GARCIA-PENA,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. John Preston Bailey,
Chief District Judge. (3:08-cr-00035-JPB-DJJ-1)
Submitted: August 18, 2009 Decided: August 28, 2009
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Brendan S. Leary, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Wheeling,
West Virginia, for Appellant. Sharon L. Potter, United States
Attorney, Paul T. Camilletti, Assistant United States Attorney,
Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Jesus Garcia-Pena pleaded guilty to illegal reentry
after deportation following a conviction for an aggravated
felony, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b)(2) (2006).
Garcia-Pena was sentenced to forty-six months of imprisonment,
followed by three years of supervised release, and now appeals.
His attorney has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), raising one issue but stating that there
are no meritorious issues for appeal. Garcia-Pena was informed
of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief but did not do
so. We affirm.
In the Anders brief, counsel questions whether the
district court erred in accepting Garcia-Pena’s guilty plea as
knowing and voluntary. Because Garcia-Pena did not move in the
district court to withdraw his guilty plea, any error in the
Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 hearing is reviewed for plain error. See
United States v. Martinez, 277 F.3d 517, 525 (4th Cir. 2002).
Furthermore, there is a strong presumption that a defendant’s
guilty plea is binding and voluntary if he has received an
adequate Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 hearing. United States v. Puckett,
61 F.3d 1092, 1099 (4th Cir. 1995); see Blackledge v. Allison,
431 U.S. 63, 74 (1977) (finding that statements made during a
plea hearing “carry a strong presumption of verity”). Our
review of the record discloses that the district court fully
2
complied with Rule 11. We conclude, therefore, that the
district court did not err in accepting Garcia-Pena’s guilty
plea.
We have examined the entire record in accordance with
the requirements of Anders and have found no meritorious issues
for appeal. We therefore affirm the judgment. This court
requires that counsel inform Garcia-Pena, in writing, of the
right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for
further review. If Garcia-Pena requests that a petition be
filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be
frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to
withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that
a copy thereof was served on Garcia-Pena. 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
3