Easton

MEMORANDUM **

Walter Easton, II appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to withdraw his *704 guilty plea. Easton claims that he is entitled to change his plea because his mental impairments precluded him from understanding the nature and consequences of his guilty plea. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and AFFIRM the district court.

Because the parties are familiar with the facts of this case, we recount them here only where necessary to explain our decision.

1. Standard for Withdrawal

The threshold issue in this case is whether Easton must show “a fair and just reason” for withdrawing his plea or whether he must satisfy the more demanding standard requiring him to show that a denial of his motion would result in a “manifest injustice.” We need not resolve this issue, however, because Easton has failed to satisfy even the more lenient “fair and just reason” standard.

2. The district court properly denied Easton’s request to withdraw his guilty plea

Easton claims that although though there is nothing in the plea colloquy evidencing his purported inability to understand the consequences of his guilty plea, a neuropsychological examination performed…