824 F. Supp. 2d 918
D.N.D.2011Background
- Defendant Francis Baker Jr. is charged with aggravated sexual abuse of a child under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153, 2241(c).
- Baker and the Government entered into a plea agreement on May 7, 2010; paragraph six recited factual admissions tying Baker to the conduct with C.B. from 1995–2002 in Indian country.
- Baker pled guilty on May 18, 2010; the court conducted a plea colloquy confirming the factual basis and Baker’s understanding of the consequences.
- PSR described extensive sexual abuse by Baker of C.B., including multiple incidents and a later confession during post‑interview; sentencing occurred August 23, 2010 at 180 months imprisonment plus 120 months supervised release.
- Baker did not appeal the sentence; on May 13, 2011 he moved to withdraw his guilty plea and for a new trial, offering a recantation by C.B. dated March 22, 2011.
- Government opposed the Rule 33 motion and argued Rule 11(d)/(e) barred withdrawal after sentencing and that Rule 33 is inapplicable to a guilty plea.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Rule 33 is available after a guilty plea and sentencing | Baker lacks trial rights; Rule 33 not applicable post-plea/sentencing. | Rule 33 can permit a new trial if a miscarriage of justice occurred or new evidence; recantation may warrant relief. | Rule 33 does not apply to a guilty plea; no new trial. |
| Whether Baker may withdraw a guilty plea under Rule 11 after sentencing | Rule 11(d)/(e) precludes withdrawal after sentencing unless exceptions apply. | Procedural route for withdrawal exists under Rule 11 regardless of trial status. | Withdrawal of guilty plea denied; Rule 11(E) bars post-sentencing withdrawal. |
| Whether recanted testimony by the victim requires withdrawal or new proceeding | Recantation challenges the credibility of the factual basis and the plea. | Recantation evidence demonstrates actual innocence and warrants relief. | C.B.’s recantation evidence is insufficient to undermine the valid guilty plea. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Reyes-Contreras, 349 F.3d 524 (8th Cir. 2003) (withdrawal post-sentence not allowed; Rule 11(e))
- Good Bird v. United States, 752 F.2d 349 (8th Cir. 1985) (proper vehicle to attack guilty plea is §2255)
- Graciani, 61 F.3d 70 (1st Cir. 1995) (Rule 33 not applicable to guilty pleas)
- United States v. Walker, 393 F.3d 842 (8th Cir. 2005) (district court broad discretion on Rule 33 motions)
- United States v. Rice, 449 F.3d 887 (8th Cir. 2006) (new trials generally disfavored; miscarriage of justice required)