The opinion of the court was delivered by: Reagan, District Judge:
On March 31, 2010, judgment was entered against Defendant Warrick D. Scott, who pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846, and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 924(c)(1)(A) and 2. Now before the Court is Defendant Scott's motion to withdraw his guilty plea (Doc. 176).
By Order dated June 29, 2011, the Court observed that the nature and timing of the motion presented Scott with a predicament with consequences that warranted his careful consideration (Doc. 185). Scott was given until July 15, 2011, to notify the Court how he would like to proceed. Scott was given two options:
1. File a motion for the Court to proceed to rule on his Rule 11 motion to withdraw his guilty plea (Doc. 176), which will result in a final order being entered denying the Rule 11 motion as untimely; or
2. File a motion requesting that the Court construe his Rule 11 motion to withdraw his guilty plea (Doc. 176) as a motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
Scott was also warned that failure to meet the July 15, 2011, deadline as directed would result in the Court denying the Rule 11 motion as untimely. The July 15, 2011, deadline has come and gone with no action by Scott. Therefore, Scott's Rule 11 motion to withdraw his guilty plea is denied for the following reasons.
Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(d) states:
A defendant may withdraw a plea of guilty or nolo contendere:
(1) Before the court accepts the plea, for any reason or no reason; or
(2) After the court accepts the plea, but before it imposes sentence if:
(A) the court rejects a plea agreement under Rule 11(c)(5); or
(B) the defendant can show a fair and just reason for requesting the withdrawal.
Judgment was entered on March 31, 2010, and Scott's motion was filed on November 29, 2010--- making his motion time barred, because it was not ...