Gleason

MEMORANDUM **

Kevin Gleason appeals his conviction for aiding and abetting the distribution and possession with intent to distribute heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 , and the district court’s denial of his motions for withdrawal of his guilty plea and substitution of counsel. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Gleason contends that his guilty plea conviction is invalid because the district court violated Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 by failing to: (1) explain the nature of the charge to which Gleason was pleading guilty, see Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(c)(1); (2) insure the voluntary nature of the guilty plea, see Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(d); and (3) establish an adequate factual basis for the plea, see Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(f). The record shows, however, that these requirements were satisfied. See United States v. Rivera-Ramirez, 715 F.2d 453, 457 (9th Cir.1983) (stating that in explaining the nature of the charges, “information provided the defendant is sufficient if it provides Mm ‘an understanding of the law in relation to the facts’ and thus permits a voluntary plea”) (quoting McCarthy v. United States, 394 U.S. 459, 466 , 89…