United States v. Menera-Alvarez, 663 F. App'x 635

In 2014 Menera was arrested in a multi-defendant methamphetamine investigation and later indicted on drug charges; he entered a Rule 11(c)(1)(C) written plea agreeing to a 100-month sentence.
The written plea stated it embodied the entire agreement, waived most appeals, and allotted a 100-month binding sentence if the court accepted the plea.
After the district court accepted the plea, Menera moved to withdraw it, alleging the government had orally promised his co-defendant Cano-Bahena would not receive a plea offer lower than 100 months and that the government later breached that promise by offering Cano-Bahena a lesser (85-month) deal.
The government responded that any statement about Cano-Bahena reflected its negotiation stance at the time and that it later revised offers based on evolving trial preparation and evidence assessment.
The district court denied withdrawal, finding the written plea superseded any prior negotiations, Menera’s plea was knowing and voluntary, and the alleged prosecutorial statement about Cano was not part of the agreement or material to Menera’s decision.
Menera appealed the denial; the government moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, which the Tenth Circuit denied and affirmed the district court’s denial of withdrawal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Menera)	Defendant's Argument (Government)	Held
Jurisdiction to hear appeal of denial of motion to withdraw plea	Appeal should proceed under 28 U.S.C. §1291 because he challenges denial of withdrawal, not the sentence itself	§3742 limits appeals of sentences under Rule 11(c)(1)(C), so appellate jurisdiction is barred	Tenth Circuit: §3742 is inapplicable; appellate jurisdiction exists under §1291 to review denial of plea-withdrawal motion
Whether plea should be withdrawn for breach of prosecutor’s alleged promise regarding co-defendant’s sentence	The prosecutor promised Cano would not get less than 100 months; that induced the plea; breach rendered plea unknowing and involuntary under Santobello	Any statement about Cano was a negotiation stance, not a term of the written plea; the written plea superseded prior statements and Menera knowingly and voluntarily pleaded	Tenth Circuit: no abuse of discretion in denial; alleged promise was not part of the written agreement, plea was knowing and voluntary, and withdrawal was not warranted

Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257 (1971) (prosecutorial promises that induce a plea must be honored; breach may permit withdrawal or specific performance)
United States v. Silva, 413 F.3d 1283 (10th Cir. 2005) (limits on appeals when defendant agreed to and received a specific Rule 11(c)(1)(C) sentence)
United States v. Garcia, 577 F.3d 1271 (10th Cir. 2009) (appeal of denial of plea-withdrawal is reviewed under §1291 jurisdiction)
United States v. Byrum, 567 F.3d 1255 (10th Cir. 2009) (standard of review and factors for post-acceptance plea-withdrawal motions)
United States v. Yazzie, 407 F.3d 1139 (10th Cir. 2005) (list of factors trial courts must consider in deciding whether a "fair and just" reason exists for plea withdrawal)