United States Court of Appeals
                            FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
                                   _____________

                                    No. 96-4086SI
                                   _____________

United States of America,                *
                                         *
                    Appellee,            * Appeal from the United States
                                         * District Court for the Southern
      v.                                 * District of Iowa.
                                         *
Miguel Angel Reyna-Segovia,              *      [PUBLISHED]
                                         *
                    Appellant.           *
                                   _____________

                            Submitted: September 12, 1997
                                Filed: September 17, 1997
                                 _____________

Before FAGG, WOLLMAN, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.
                          _____________

PER CURIAM.

       The Government charged Miguel Angel Reyna-Segovia with conspiracy to
distribute methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846 (1994).
Reyna-Segovia initially pleaded guilty to the charge, but then, against the repeated
advice of counsel, moved to withdraw his plea. The district court found Reyna-Segovia
met his burden on the factors warranting withdrawal, and granted the motion. See
United States v. Prior, 

, 657 (8th Cir. 1997), petition for cert. filed, No.
96-8478 (U.S. Apr. 3, 1997). At trial, co-conspirators testified about their drug
activity with Reyna-Segovia. Based on this testimony, the jury convicted Reyna-
Segovia and at sentencing the district court attributed more methamphetamine to him
than the plea agreement had. Having lost his gamble with the jury and having received
a longer sentence, Reyna-Segovia contends on appeal the district court should have
denied his motion to withdraw his plea. According to Reyna-Segovia, the district court
should have disbelieved him at the withdrawal hearing and should have warned him a
jury would likely convict him. We disagree. Reyna-Segovia received the withdrawal
he sought, and now must accept the consequences of his request. Cf. United States v.
Owens, 

, 1157 (4th Cir. 1990). More appropriately, Reyna-Segovia
challenges his jury conviction on several grounds. We reject them all. Given the
overwhelming evidence against Reyna-Segovia, a reasonable jury could easily find him
guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. See United States v. McMurray, 

, 1412
(8th Cir. 1994). Because the Government’s use of a paid informant was permissible,
see United States v. King, 

, 390-91 (8th Cir. 1986) (per curiam), the
prosecutor did not commit misconduct at Reyna-Segovia’s trial. See United States v.
Flores-Mireles, 

, 341 (8th Cir. 1997). Lastly, Reyna-Segovia should raise
his claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel collaterally rather than on direct
appeal. See United States v. Kenyon, 

, 785 (8th Cir. 1993). We thus affirm
Reyna-Segovia’s conviction.

      A true copy.

             Attest:

                     CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.




                                          -2-