United States v. Lauro Estrada, 486 F. App'x 441

Estrada appeals a guilty plea conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 1,000 kilograms or more of marijuana.
Government stipulated Estrada was responsible for less than 1,000 kilograms, creating a claimed lack of factual basis for the 1,000+ kilograms element.
Estrada moved to withdraw his guilty plea but did not argue insufficiency of the factual basis in district court.
The issue is reviewed for plain error because the argument was not preserved.
PSR and admissions showed more than 1,000 kg of marijuana, though the plea stipulation contradicted this; court held no plain error.
Court AFFIRMED the conviction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the guilty-plea was flawed for lack of factual basis	Estrada argues insufficient basis due to <1,000 kg stipulation	Government contends no plain error given the overall basis including admissions	Not plain error; affirmed

United States v. Marek, 238 F.3d 310 (5th Cir. 2001) (establishes that the sentencing record may supply the factual basis)
United States v. Hildenbrand, 527 F.3d 466 (5th Cir. 2008) (allows reasonable inferences from post-plea evidence to support a factual basis)
United States v. Dunigan, 555 F.3d 501 (5th Cir. 2009) (preservation requirement for plea-basis issues)
United States v. Fernandez-Cusco, 447 F.3d 382 (5th Cir. 2006) (plain-error review governs unpreserved claims)
United States v. Rodriguez-Parra, 581 F.3d 227 (5th Cir. 2009) (indicates error not plain where issue of first impression)
United States v. Hull, 160 F.3d 265 (5th Cir. 1998) (plain-error standard applied in plea cases)