USA v. Jose Lizarraras-Chacon, No. 19-40424 (5th Cir. 2020)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 19-40424 Document: 00515414491 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/13/2020 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 19-40424 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED May 13, 2020 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff−Appellee, versus JOSE DE JESUS LIZARRARAS-CHACON, Defendant−Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas No. 5:18-CR-310-1 Before DAVIS, SMITH, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Jose Lizarraras-Chacon appeals his conviction of illegal reentry, main- Pursuant to 5TH CIRCUIT RULE 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIRCUIT RULE 47.5.4. * Case: 19-40424 Document: 00515414491 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/13/2020 No. 19-40424 taining that the district court abused its discretion in denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. “[A] district court abuses its discretion if it bases its decision on an error of law or a clearly erroneous assessment of the evidence.” United States v. Lord, 915 F.3d 1009, 1013−14 (5th Cir.) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted), cert. denied, 140 S. Ct. 320 (2019). In evaluating the denial of a motion to withdraw a plea, we consider the totality of circumstances, including the seven factors enumerated in United States v. Carr, 740 F.2d 339, 343−44 (5th Cir. 1984). “[N]o single factor or combination of factors mandates a particular result, and [the defendant] bears the burden of establishing a fair and just reason for withdrawal of his plea.” United States v. Still, 102 F.3d 118, 125 (5th Cir. 1996). Lizarraras-Chacon’s motion to withdraw was based on Pereira v. Sessions, 138 S. Ct. 2105, 2109−10 (2018), which held that a notice to appear (“NTA”) that fails to designate a time and place of hearing does not trigger the stop-time rule for cancellation of removal, and on district court rulings that, relying on Pereira, dismissed illegal-reentry indictments based on invalid NTAs. Lizarraras-Chacon acknowledges that United States v. Pedroza-Rocha, 933 F.3d 490 (5th Cir.), petition for cert. filed (U.S. Nov. 6, 2019) (No. 19-6588), forecloses his argument based on Pereira and that he is raising the issue only to preserve it for further review. Accordingly, irrespective of the Carr factors, Lizarraras-Chacon cannot show that the district court abused its discretion in determining that he failed to carry his burden of providing a fair and just reason for withdrawal of his plea. See Lord, 915 F.3d at 1013−14; Still, 102 F.3d at 125. The judgment is AFFIRMED. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
