You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

United States v. Robert Allen Custard

Citations: 19 F.3d 34; 1994 WL 75838; 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 13137Docket: 93-1174

Court: Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit; March 7, 1994; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case involves an appeal by a defendant seeking to withdraw his guilty plea in the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. The defendant argued that he lacked understanding during the plea process, faced threats from a U.S. Marshal, experienced inadequate trial preparation, and was compelled to appear in jail clothing. Central to the case is the legal standard that a defendant does not possess an absolute right to withdraw a guilty plea before sentencing and must show a fair and just reason for such a withdrawal. The appellate court evaluated the district court's decision under an abuse of discretion standard and found no evidence of unfairness or injustice in the plea process. The court noted that the district court had conducted a meticulous plea proceeding, ensuring the defendant's understanding of his rights and the implications of his plea. Consequently, the appellate court affirmed the district court's denial of the motion to withdraw the plea. The decision, while not binding precedent, may be cited in accordance with the court's General Order from November 29, 1993, and the mandate was issued immediately.

Legal Issues Addressed

Binding Precedent of Judicial Orders

Application: The order and judgment are not binding precedent except under specific legal doctrines.

Reasoning: This order and judgment is not binding precedent except under specific legal doctrines, although it may be cited under the court's General Order from November 29, 1993.

Standard of Review for Withdrawal of Guilty Plea

Application: The appellate court reviewed the district court's decision for abuse of discretion, affirming the denial of the motion to withdraw the plea.

Reasoning: The standard for review is whether the district court abused its discretion, which occurs only if the court acted unjustly or unfairly.

Withdrawal of Guilty Plea

Application: The court held that the defendant must demonstrate a fair and just reason to withdraw a guilty plea prior to sentencing.

Reasoning: The court emphasized that a defendant does not have an absolute right to withdraw a guilty plea prior to sentencing and must demonstrate a fair and just reason for doing so.