UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-4184
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
BYRON ANTHONY GREY, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, District Judge. (8:08-
cr-00462-RWT-1)
Submitted: January 31, 2012 Decided: March 6, 2012
Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed in part; remanded in part by unpublished per curiam
opinion.
Richard Alan Finci, HOULON, BERMAN, BERGMAN, FINCI, LEVENSTEIN &
SKOK, LLC, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellant. Rod J.
Rosenstein, United States Attorney, Deborah A. Johnston, Stacy
D. Belf, Assistant United States Attorneys, Greenbelt, Maryland,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Byron Anthony Grey, Jr., pleaded guilty to conspiracy
to distribute and possess with intent to distribute fifty grams
or more of cocaine base (Count 1) and possession of a firearm in
furtherance of a drug trafficking crime under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)
(2006) (Count 5). Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(1)(C), the
parties agreed that Grey would be sentenced to 300 months’
imprisonment. The district court sentenced Grey to 300 months’
imprisonment (240 months for Count 1 and 60 consecutive months
for Count 5). Grey appeals, alleging that the district court
should have granted his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. For
the reasons that follow, we affirm.
We find no abuse of discretion in the district court’s
denial of the motion to withdraw. United States v. Ubakanma,
215 F.3d 421, 424 (4th Cir. 2000) (providing standard of
review). The court carefully analyzed Grey’s motion in light of
the six factors discussed in our opinion in United States v.
Moore, 931 F.2d 245, 248 (4th Cir. 1991). Moreover, we find
that Grey’s guilty plea hearing was properly conducted under
Fed. R. Crim. P. 11. United States v. Puckett, 61 F.3d 1092,
1099 (4th Cir. 1995) (noting that a proper Rule 11 hearing
creates a strong presumption that the plea is final and
binding). Accordingly, we conclude that Grey’s claim is without
merit.
2
Thus, we affirm Grey’s convictions and sentence. We
note, however, that Grey pleaded guilty to and was sentenced for
possessing a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime
under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). The written criminal judgment
mistakenly states that Grey was convicted and sentenced for
being a felon in possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C.
§ 922(g) (2006). We remand for correction of this clerical
error. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 36; United States v. Blackwell, 515
F.2d 125, 127 (4th Cir. 1975). 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 IN PART;
REMANDED IN PART
3