United States v. Zamudio

Case: 21-50467 Document: 00516249301 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/22/2022

United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit

FILED
No. 21-50467 March 22, 2022
Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Carlos Alberto Zamudio,

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 1:18-CR-410-17

Before King, Costa, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Carlos Alberto Zamudio pleaded guilty of conspiring to possess with
the intent to distribute cocaine. He was sentenced to twelve months and one
day of imprisonment and three years of supervised release. Shortly before he

*
Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 21-50467 Document: 00516249301 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/22/2022

No. 21-50467

was sentenced, Zamudio filed a motion to withdraw his guilty plea. He now
appeals the district court’s denial of that motion.
In his motion to withdraw his guilty plea, Zamudio raised claims that
implicated the knowing and voluntary nature of his guilty plea and waiver and
suggested that they were the result of ineffective assistance of counsel. As
such Zamudio’s appeal is not barred by the waiver-of-appeal provision in his
plea agreement. See United States v. Strother, 977 F.3d 438, 442-43 (5th Cir.
2020).
A defendant may withdraw a guilty plea after it has been accepted by
the district court but before sentencing if he shows a “fair and just reason”
for seeking withdrawal. Id. at 443. We review the district court’s denial of a
motion to withdraw a guilty plea for abuse of discretion. Id.
A review of the record, Zamudio’s arguments, and the district court’s
consideration of the factors originally set forth in United States v. Carr, 740
F.2d 339, 343-44 (5th Cir. 1984), shows that the district court did not abuse
its discretion in denying Zamudio’s motion. See Strother, 977 F.3d at 443-47.
Zamudio’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.