United States v. Fernando Novelo Nostratis

Fernando Nostratis appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. He contends that his plea was not knowing and voluntary because he did not understand English well enough to comprehend the terms, conditions, and consequences of his plea agreement. He argues that his inability to comprehend his plea agreement is a fair and just reason for the court to allow him to withdraw his plea under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(d)(2)(B). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

BACKGROUND

On October 20, 1999, a grand jury returned a four-count superseding indictment against Nostratis: conspiracy to import methamphetamine, 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 (a), 960, and 963 (count I); importation of methamphetamine, 18 U.S.C. § 2 and 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 (a), 960 (count II); attempt to possess methamphetamine with intent to distribute, 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1), 846 (count III); and use of a communication facility to facilitate a drug crime, 21 U.S.C. § 843 (b) (count IV). After first pleading not guilty, on January 25, 2000, Nostratis changed his plea to guilty on counts I and III pursuant to a plea agreement. The district court conducted a Rule…