Background
Gary Duane Cool pled guilty pursuant to a plea agreement to possession with intent to distribute more than fifty grams of methamphetamine in violation of Section twenty-one United States Code Section eight hundred forty-one. The district court sentenced Cool to one hundred eighty-eight months of imprisonment within the advisory Sentencing Guidelines range. On appeal, Cool’s counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California stating there were no meritorious grounds for appeal but questioning the validity of the guilty plea.
The court’s reasoning
The court noted that because Cool did not move to withdraw his plea or otherwise challenge it before the district court, the review was for plain error. The court emphasized that a properly conducted Rule eleven colloquy raises a strong presumption that the plea is final and binding. The magistrate judge fully complied with Rule eleven and properly found that Cool’s plea was knowing, voluntary, and supported by an independent factual basis. The court reviewed the entire record in accordance with Anders and found no meritorious grounds for appeal.
What it means going forward
The affirmation upholds the validity of the guilty plea and the one hundred eighty-eight month sentence, confirming that the district court’s adherence to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure eleven was sufficient to bind the defendant.