Defendant's MOTION to Withdraw Plea of Guilty by Andre Lorquet — USA v. Lorquet (Dkt. 55)

Record facts

Summary

Defendant's Motion to Withdraw Plea, filed March 13, 2023 in United States v. Andre Lorquet, Case No. 22-cr-20326-KMM, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. It states the defendant pleaded guilty on January 24, 2023 to Count 7, charging money laundering in violation of Title 18, United States Code, §1957, and Count 9, charging aggravated identity theft under §1028A(a)(1), with the Government agreeing to dismiss Counts 1 through 6 and Count 8. It states he now wishes to withdraw the plea, gives the reasons he offers, and notes those reasons go to undersigned counsel's effectiveness, prompting a separate motion to withdraw as counsel. Counsel reports contacting the Assistant United States Attorney under Local Rule 88.9, who objects. A memorandum of law cites appellate decisions on the fair-and-just-reason standard for withdrawal before sentencing.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

1 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA  
 
CASE NO.: 22-cr-20326-KMM 
 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA            
                      Plaintiff, 
vs. 
 
ANDRE LORQUET, 
 
           Defendant. 
                                                                      / 
 
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO WITHDRAW PLEA 
The Defendant, Andre Lorquet, by and through undersigned counsel, files this Motion to 
Withdraw Plea, and in support states the following: 
1. On January 24, 2023, Mr. Lorquet plead guilty to Count 7 of the Indictment, which 
charges the defendant with Money Laundering, in violation of Title 18, United States 
Code, §1957; and Count 9 of the Indictment, which charges the defendant with 
Aggravated Identity Theft, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, §1028A(a)(1). 
2. The Government has agreed to dismiss Counts 1 through 6 and Count 8. 
3. Since pleading guilty, Mr. Lorquet has decided that he wished to withdraw his plea of 
guilty. 
4. Mr. Lorquet states that he plead guilty because he was under duress, that he did not 
understand he was signing a plea agreement and believed that he was signing 
paperwork related to the reinstatement of his bond.  It should be noted that the 
undersigned reviewed the plea agreement with Mr. Lorquet in detail. 
5. Mr. Lorquet’s reasons for wishing to withdraw his plea are directly related to 
challenging the undersigned’s effectiveness of representation.  

 
2 
6. As such, the undersigned is filing this motion on behalf of Mr. Loquet and filing a 
separate Motion to Withdraw as Counsel due to ethical considerations.  
7. Pursuant to Local Rule 88.9, undersigned counsel contacted AUSA Jonathan Bailyn, 
who objects to the motion to withdraw plea.  
MEMORANDUM OF LAW 
In United States v. Brehm, 442 F. 3d 1291 (11th Cir. 2006) the court held:  
After the district court has accepted a plea and before sentencing, a 
defendant may withdraw a guilty plea if "the defendant can show a fair 
and just reason for requesting the withdrawal." Fed. R.Crim.P. 
11(d)(2)(B). In determining whether the defendant has met his 
burden to show a "fair and just reason," a district court "may 
consider the totality of the circumstances surrounding the plea." 
United States v. Buckles, 843 F.2d 469, 471-72 (11th Cir.1988). In the 
course of this inquiry, we consider "(1) whether close assistance of 
counsel was available; (2) whether the plea was knowing and voluntary; 
(3) whether judicial resources would be conserved; and (4) whether the 
government would be prejudiced if the defendant were allowed to 
withdraw his plea." Id. at 472 (citations omitted). "The good faith, 
credibility and weight of a defendant's assertions in support of a motion 
[to withdraw a guilty plea] are issues for the trial court to decide." Id. 
Additionally, "[t]he longer the delay between the entry of the plea and the 
motion to withdraw it, the more substantial the reasons must be as to why 
the defendant seeks withdrawal." Id. at 473. Brehm at 1298.  
 
This Circuit has held that “[T]his permissive withdrawal rule is to be liberally 
construed, but, pursuant to it, there is no absolute right to withdraw a guilty plea.” United States 
v. Buckles, 843 F.2d 469, 471 (11th Cir. 1988).” See United States v. Villanova, No. 12-12880 
(11th Cir. 2013).  
WHEREFORE, the Defendant, respectfully requests this Honorable Court set aside the 
guilty plea and return his case to the trial calendar.  
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 
3 
I HEREBY certify that on March 13, 2023, undersigned counsel electronically filed 
foregoing document with the Clerk of Courts using CM/ECF which will send notification of such 
filing to all counsel of record. 
Respectfully submitted, 
 
BOZANIC LAW, P.A. 
2847 Hollywood Blvd. 
Hollywood, FL 33020 
Telephone: 
954.920.9750 
Facsimile: 
954.400.0335 
E-Mail: Zeljka@bozaniclaw.com 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/Zeljka Bozanic 
By:_________________________________ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Zeljka Bozanic 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Florida Bar No.  23707

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.flsd.616975.55.0.pdf

Size

99,708 bytes

SHA-256

3e12f6e6a92432f44bb5622e581b2443f04bc72abab63dace7700f555cd947b8

Our copy

gov.uscourts.flsd.616975.55.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)