Wagner
United States v. Wagner
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
David Wagner appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to withdraw his guilty plea for possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 .
Before reaching the merits of the denial, the Government contends that Wagner waived his right to appeal as part of his plea agreement. We disagree. When plea agreements are contested, the Government is held “to the literal terms of the agreement, and ordinarily must bear responsibility for any lack of clarity.” United States v. Baker, 25 F.3d 1452, 1458 (9th Cir.1994). Here, Wagner’s plea agreement waiver facially bars only an appeal from the sentence. As Wagner’s present appeal is the denial of a motion to withdraw a guilty plea, it is not one of the barred sentencing issues.
Wagner claims that the district court erred in denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. Under Rule 11(d) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Wagner must show a fair and just reason for withdrawing his plea. See United States v. Nostratis, 321 F.3d 1206, 1208 (9th Cir.2003) (citing Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(d)(2)(B)). The burden is upon Wagner to meet this standard. Id.