Hughes

MEMORANDUM **

Lawrence Hughes seeks to withdraw his guilty plea and appeals his sentence. Horace Green also appeals his sentence. We affirm the district court’s acceptance of Hughes’ guilty plea. We vacate the sentences of both Hughes and Green and remand for re-sentencing to allow the district court to apply the proper standard for the physical restraint enhancement. Because the parties are familiar with the history of this case, we will not recount it here.

I

The district court did not plainly err under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 by failing to give one of the warnings required by the rule and by fading to determine whether there was a factual basis for his guilty plea. See United States v. Minore, 292 F.3d 1109, 1117 (9th Cir. 2002) (describing standard of review when a defendant does not object before the district court).

To satisfy her obligation under Rule 11(b)(1)(G), the district court judge *564 must inform the defendant of the nature of the charges. United States v. Pena, 314 F.3d 1152, 1156 (9th Cir.2003) (citing United States v. Bruce, 976 F.2d 552, 559 (9th Cir.1992), rev’d on other grounds by United States v. Vonn, 535 U.S. 55 , 122 S.Ct. 1043 , 152…