First, we conclude that the district court did not
abuse its discretion in denying Simmons’ motion to withdraw his
guilty plea to Count Three. See United States v. Ubakanma, 215
F.3d 421, 424 (4th Cir. 2000) (stating standard of review). “A
defendant has no absolute right to withdraw a guilty plea,”
United States v. Bowman, 348 F.3d 408, 413 (4th Cir. 2003)
(internal quotation marks omitted), but instead bears the burden
of showing a “fair and just reason” for withdrawing his plea.
Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(d)(2)(B); United States v. Battle, 499 F.3d
315, 319 (4th Cir. 2007). See also United States v. Moore, 931
F.2d 245, 248 (4th Cir. 1991) (describing several factors that
should inform a district court’s determination whether to allow
a defendant to withdraw a guilty plea).
Here, although Simmons argues that he is legally
innocent of the offense charged in Count Three because the gun
remained in his van during the bank robbery, we cannot agree.
See 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A) (criminalizing anyone who “uses,”
“carries,” or “possesses” a firearm “during and in relation to
any crime of violence”); Muscarello v. United States, 524 U.S.
125, 127 (1998) (someone who knowingly possesses and conveys
firearms in a vehicle “carries” a firearm for purposes of
§ 924(c)); United States v. McCaskill, 676 F.2d 995, 1000 (4th
Cir. 1982) (noting that flight is a part of a robbery offense).
Accord United States v. Williams, 344 F.3d 365, 372-73 (3d Cir.