Sabrina-Rodriguez

*170 MEMORANDUM **

Francisco Sabrina-Rodriguez appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to withdraw his guilty plea to possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

After pleading guilty, but before being sentenced, Sabrina-Rodriguez moved to withdraw his plea alleging that his attorney provided erroneous advice regarding the sentence Sabrina-Rodriguez would receive and that the error was not remedied by the plea colloquy conducted by the district court. We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying the motion to withdraw because Sabrina-Rodriguez did not “show a fair and just reason” for allowing the withdrawal. Fed. R.Crim.P. 11(d)(2)(B).

“[A]n erroneous prediction by defense attorney concerning sentencing does not entitle a defendant to challenge his guilty plea.” United States v. Michlin, 34 F.3d 896, 899 (9th Cir.1994) (internal citations omitted). While we have recognized that an exception to that rule may exist where counsel’s error resulted in a gross mischaracterization of the likely outcome, see id., this case does…