Dey

MEMORANDUM **

Dey contends that her plea resulted from extreme stress, and was therefore involuntary. She argues further that the court would have recognized the involuntary character of the plea if it had made a more searching inquiry into her state of mind and reasons for pleading guilty. If Dey is correct that her plea was not knowing and voluntary, the waiver contained in her plea agreement would be similarly invalid. See United States v. Nguyen, 235 F.3d 1179, 1182 (9th Cir.2000) (“The sole test of a waiver’s validity is whether it was made knowingly and voluntarily.”). We must therefore look beyond the mere presence of the waiver, and determine whether the record contains evidence that De/s plea was involuntary.

Under Fed.R.Crim.P. 32(e), a defendant may seek to withdraw a guilty plea for “any fair and just reason” at any point before imposition of sentence. Lack of voluntariness, in violation of Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(d), would be one such reason. See United States v. Rios-Ortiz, 830 F.2d 1067, 1070 (9th Cir.1987). Evidence of mental affliction, moreover, may be sufficient to show lack of voluntariness. United States v. Christensen, 18 F.3d 822, 826 (9th Cir.1994). However, Dey…