No. 99-20497
-1-
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-20497
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
DANIEL R. LINDER,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-98-CR-409-ALL
--------------------
February 16, 2000
Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Daniel R. Linder challenges his convictions of impersonating
an officer of the United States and being a felon in possession
of a firearm. His sole contention on appeal is that the district
court abused its discretion in denying his motion to withdraw his
guilty plea, which was filed prior to sentencing. He asserts
that his plea was not knowingly made because it had been
predicated upon his mistaken belief that pleading guilty was the
only way to avoid the possibility that his sentence could be
enhanced by his prior kidnaping conviction. He ascribes this
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 99-20497
-2-
mistaken belief to representations made by the Government during
the plea bargaining process.
This court reviews the denial of a Rule 32(e) motion for an
abuse of discretion. See United States v. Grant, 117 F.3d 788,
789 (5th Cir. 1997). The district court may grant a motion to
withdraw a guilty plea before a defendant is sentenced if the
defendant shows “any fair and just reason.” Fed. R. Crim. P.
32(e); see United States v. Brewster, 137 F.3d 853, 857 (5th
Cir.), cert. denied, 119 S. Ct. 247 (1998); United States v.
Carr, 740 F.2d 339, 343-44 (5th Cir. 1984).
A review of the circumstances leading up to the entry of
Linder’s guilty plea reveals that the district court did not
abuse its discretion in denying his motion to withdraw that plea.
Linder’s guilty plea was knowingly entered, and he does not
assert that he was actually innocent of the offenses of
conviction. See Brewster, 137 F.3d at 857; Carr, 740 F.2d at
343-44. Accordingly, Linder’s convictions are
AFFIRMED.