Burns Chronicles No 53 – Plea Withdrawal – A Privilege or a Right?
Burns Chronicles No 53
Plea Withdrawal – A Privilege or a Right?
Gary Hunt
Outpost of Freedom
January 2, 2017
On October 12, 2016, Ryan Payne submitted to the Court a Motion to Withdraw his Plea Agreement. This was filed over two weeks before the Jury verdict (October 27, 2016), finding the defendants “Not Guilty” of the charges that included Payne in the original Indictment.
Payne pled guilty, in a Plea Agreement, on July 19, 2016. In the hearing on the Plea Agreement, when asked how he pled, he stated, “In pursuing that effort [the occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge], I understand I — I have come to understand that folks who were — who work for the Government, that that Constitution ordained, perceived my actions as threatening or intimidating. And, thereby, I – I understand myself to have been guilty of the charge that I’m charged with.”
Clearly, he did not say that he was guilty. He said that he understood himself “to have been guilty of the charges“. So, we have to wonder why the equivocation that was apparent in his statement to the Court. And, we will get to that. However, let’s continue from where we are.
The Court (Queen Judge Anna Brown) gave her Order Denying Defendant Ryan Payne’s Motion to Withdraw Guilty Plea. From that document, we can get some dates with regard to the timing of Payne’s plea agreement and other contributing factors.
Standard
Judge Brown sets out the “Standard” upon which the Court is to determine if a plea should be withdrawn. The citations she uses are all from the 9th Circuit, as they should be.
“Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(d)(2)(B) provides that a defendant may withdraw a plea of guilty prior to sentencing if he “‘can show a fair and just reason for requesting the withdrawal.’” United States v. Mayweather, 634 F.3d 498, 504 (9th Cir. 2010). “The defendant has the burden of demonstrating a fair and just reason for withdrawal of a plea.” United States v. Davis, 428 F.3d 802, 805 (9th Cir. 2005). “‘Fair and just reasons for withdrawal include inadequate Rule 11 plea colloquies, newly discovered evidence, intervening circumstances, or any other reason for withdrawing the plea that did not exist when the defendant entered his plea.’” Mayweather, 634 F.3d at 504 (quoting United States v. Ortega–Ascanio, 376 F.3d 879, 883 (9th Cir. 2004)). “‘While the defendant is not permitted to withdraw his plea ‘simply on a lark,’ the ‘fair and just standard’ is generous and must be applied liberally.’” Mayweather, 634 F.3d at 504 (quoting United States v. McTiernan, 546 F.3d 1160, 1167 (9th Cir. 2008)).
You will note that the standard is based upon “fair and just”, and that the burden is on the defendant. However, the last citation makes clear that the “‘fair and just standard’ is generous and must be liberally applied.”
Continue reading ‘Burns Chronicles No 53 – Plea Withdrawal – A Privilege or a Right?’ »