IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-40855
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JUAN ANTONIO CERON,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. C-01-CR-69-1
--------------------
July 2, 2002
Before DAVIS, BENAVIDES, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jose Antonio Ceron (“Ceron”) appeals his guilty-plea
conviction and sentence for possession of 428 kilograms of
marijuana with intent to distribute. Ceron argues that his
guilty plea was involuntary because the district court did not
advise him of the mandatory minimum 60-month sentence and did not
make further inquiry when Ceron indicated at rearraignment that
he had been promised a safety-valve reduction in exchange for his
guilty plea. He also argues that the district court abused its
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 01-40855
-2-
discretion in denying his FED. R. CRIM. P. 32(e) motion to
withdraw his guilty plea, in light of the involuntariness of the
plea and his assertion of innocence.
Ceron’s arguments concerning the voluntariness of his plea
are factually erroneous. The corrected transcript of the
rearraignment shows that Ceron replied “no” when asked whether he
had been promised a safety-valve reduction. The record also
shows that he was admonished concerning the mandatory minimum
sentence in accordance with FED. R. CRIM. P. 11. This issue is
without merit.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying
Ceron’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea. The district court
weighed the factors set forth in United States v. Carr, 740 F.2d
339, 343-44 (5th Cir. 1984), and determined that the totality of
the circumstances did not support withdrawal of the plea.
Ceron’s declarations of guilt at rearraignment were clear,
unequivocal, and carry a strong presumption of verity. See
United States v. Lampazianie, 251 F.3d 519, 524 (5th Cir. 2001).
The record shows that the district court conducted a careful and
thorough plea colloquy pursuant to FED. R. CRIM. P. 11, that Ceron
was assisted by counsel at rearraignment, and that his guilty
plea was knowing and voluntary. Ceron did not carry his burden
of showing a fair and just reason to withdraw the plea. See FED.
R. CRIM. P. 32(e); Lampazianie, 251 F.3d at 525.
AFFIRMED.