United States v. Willie Gray, 717 F.3d 450

Defendant Willie Cornelius Gray pleaded guilty and later moved to withdraw his plea four weeks after entry and before sentencing.
District court denied the motion; Gray appealed, arguing his plea was unknowing, involuntary, and made while confused or misinformed.
The court considered the seven Carr factors for pre-sentencing plea withdrawal: innocence assertion, government prejudice, delay, inconvenience to court, assistance of counsel, voluntariness, and waste of resources.
The district court found Gray received close assistance of counsel, made solemn in-court declarations of understanding, and that counsel’s advice was accurate and not misleading.
The court also found Gray’s delay and the burden of rescheduling would substantially inconvenience the court and waste judicial resources; the Government would not be prejudiced but that alone did not warrant withdrawal.
The appellate court reviewed for abuse of discretion and affirmed, concluding no legal error or clearly erroneous factual finding by the district court.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Gray may withdraw his guilty plea pre-sentencing under Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(d)(2)(B)	Gray argued his plea was unknowing and involuntary due to misinformation, confusion, and reservations	District court found plea knowing, voluntary, and based on accurate counsel advice; Gray delayed and would inconvenience court	Denied — no fair and just reason shown; plea withdrawal refused
Effect of delay and inconvenience on withdrawal motion	Gray acknowledged four-week delay but argued other factors favored withdrawal	District court weighed delay and court inconvenience against Gray	Held — delay and inconvenience weighed against withdrawal
Role of counsel and defendant’s in-court statements	Gray claimed confusion despite counsel’s assistance	District court found close assistance of counsel and that Gray’s in-court solemn declarations presumed truthful	Held — counsel’s assistance and in-court statements supported denial
Whether Government prejudice or assertion of innocence compels withdrawal	Gray noted no government prejudice and asserted innocence	Court held lack of prejudice and assertion of innocence alone insufficient under Carr	Held — these factors did not justify reversal

United States v. Carr, 740 F.2d 339 (5th Cir. 1984) (sets seven-factor test for pre-sentencing plea withdrawal)
United States v. McKnight, 570 F.3d 641 (5th Cir. 2009) (standard of review: abuse of discretion for plea-withdrawal denials)
United States v. Mann, 161 F.3d 840 (5th Cir. 1998) (abuse of discretion requires legal error or clearly erroneous factual findings)
United States v. Adam, 296 F.3d 327 (5th Cir. 2002) (in-court solemn declarations carry a strong presumption of verity)