United States v. Joseph J.

MEMORANDUM **

Defendant-Appellant Joseph J. (“the defendant”), a Native American juvenile male, pled guilty to committing second degree murder within Indian country. He subsequently moved to withdraw his plea prior to sentencing. The district court denied the motion and the defendant appeals, arguing that he did not understand the mens rea element “malice aforethought” at the time he pled guilty, that new evidence has been discovered since his plea was entered, and that he has a cognitive impairment that limited his ability to understand the plea proceedings. We disagree, and affirm the order of the district court.

I.

Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(e) governs the withdrawal of guilty pleas:

Fed. R. Crim P. 82(e).

The defendant argues that the Rule 11 hearing was insufficient to establish that his guilty plea was knowing and voluntary. However, the record shows that the colloquy between the Magistrate Judge and the defendant was very thorough, that the defendant was provided with ample opportunity to consult his counsel and to pose questions to the court, and that the plea was not accepted until the Magistrate Judge was convinced that the plea was knowing and voluntary.…