U.S. v. Fard

Dist. Ct. erred in denying defendant’s request to withdraw his guilty plea to wire fraud charge arising out of scheme to obtain money and property from mortgage lenders by means of submitting documents containing false statements in order to induce lenders to loan said money. Record suggested that defendant did not understand nature of instant wire fraud charge, where defendant’s colloquy demonstrated that defendant was confused about concept of fraudulent intent and was equivocal in many of his answers to Dist. Ct. regarding his actions. Moreover, neither Dist. Ct. nor defendant’s counsel explained nature of fraudulent intent in record.