Fed. R. Crim. P. 11

700 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 130 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Hendron v. Cowan
  532 F.2d 1081· 6th Cir.· 1976-04-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the guilty plea was voluntary under pre-Boykin standards and that Boykin v. Alabama should not be applied retroactively.
• Fontaine v. United States
  526 F.2d 514· 6th Cir.· 1975-12-08 ·cited 10×
  A guilty plea is valid if intelligently and voluntarily made, even if the arresting officer did not enumerate each constitutional right waived, and an illegal arrest does not invalidate a voluntary guilty plea.
• United States v. Hermann
  524 F.2d 1103· 2d Cir.· 1975-10-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a defendant cannot raise a new issue on appeal that was not presented to the district court, and that the district court did not err in sentencing.
• Scranton v. Whealon
  514 F.2d 99· 6th Cir.· 1975-03-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the plea of guilty was voluntarily made and that Boykin v. Alabama does not require a specific judicial colloquy for state court guilty pleas entered before Boykin was decided.
• Wall v. United States
  500 F.2d 38· 10th Cir.· 1974-07-22 ·cited 10×
  A trial court is not required to advise a defendant of every collateral consequence of a guilty plea, including the possibility of consecutive sentences, as long as the direct consequences and maximum penalties are understood.
• United States v. Gorden
  495 F.2d 308· 7th Cir.· 1974-04-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant's guilty plea was factually supported, the presentence report disclosures were adequate, and imprisonment for failure to deposit withheld taxes does not violate the Fifth Amendment.
• United States v. Huffman
  490 F.2d 412· 8th Cir.· 1973-12-18 ·cited 10×
• United States v. Walid Warwar
  478 F.2d 1183· 1st Cir.· 1973-03-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while the district court failed to comply with Rule 11 by not informing the defendant of potential waiver of rights, the conviction would not be overturned because the waived claim was meritless.
• Beavers v. Park J. Anderson
  474 F.2d 1114· 10th Cir.· 1973-03-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that where a habeas petitioner alleges coercion in his guilty plea, the federal court must conduct an inquiry to determine if the state court adequately ascertained the plea's voluntariness, even if a written form exists.
• United States v. Earnest Dean Sanders
  435 F.2d 1282· 10th Cir.· 1970-12-22 ·cited 10×
  A guilty plea is void if the sentencing court fails to personally address the defendant and determine their understanding of the nature of the charges, as required by Rule 11.
• Sherburne v. United States
  433 F.2d 1350· 8th Cir.· 1970-11-18 ·cited 10×
  The court should have held an evidentiary hearing to determine if the defendant fully understood the charges and maximum sentence before denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea.
• Dickie Lee Lawrence v. Lake F. Russell
  430 F.2d 718· 6th Cir.· 1970-09-04 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner's guilty plea was voluntary and that the district court's denial of the writ of habeas corpus was correct.
• Ellis Salem George v. United States
  421 F.2d 128· 2d Cir.· 1970-01-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant's guilty plea, entered before the Supreme Court's decision in McCarthy v. United States, was not automatically invalidated by the trial judge's failure to comply with Rule 11.
• Lord v. United States Gov't
  412 F.2d 499· 4th Cir.· 1969-06-13 ·cited 10×
  A defendant whose guilty plea was accepted before the decision in McCarthy v. United States without full compliance with Rule 11 is entitled to a hearing to determine if the plea was voluntary and understandingly made, not automatically to plead anew.
• United States v. Phillips
  403 F.2d 963· 6th Cir.· 1968-12-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant was entitled to an evidentiary hearing to determine his eligibility for treatment under the Narcotics Addict Rehabilitation Act and that the district court should also rule on the Rule 11 issue regarding parole notification.
• Oliver v. United States
  398 F.2d 353· 9th Cir.· 1968-07-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the prisoner's allegations regarding mental incompetence, coercion, and Rule 11 violations were insufficient to warrant an evidentiary hearing on his motion to vacate sentence.
• Commonwealth Edison Co. v. Allis-Chalmers Mfg. Co.
  323 F.2d 412· 7th Cir.· 1963-09-12 ·cited 10×
  Judgments entered on nolo contendere pleas are considered consent judgments excluded from the prima facie evidentiary benefit of Clayton Act § 5(a), but judgments entered on guilty pleas are not.
• Sorrenti v. United States
  306 F.2d 236· 5th Cir.· 1962-07-26 ·cited 10×
  A guilty plea is voluntary if, despite any promises, the defendant, with competent counsel, understands the consequences and voluntarily chooses to plead.
• United States v. Melancon
  972 F.2d 566· 5th Cir.· 1992-09-03 ·cited 9×
  A defendant may waive their statutory right to appeal their sentence as part of a valid plea agreement, and such waivers are enforceable if informed and voluntary.
• United States v. Garcia
  956 F.2d 41· 4th Cir.· 1992-01-31 ·cited 9×·via Rule 11 Hearing
  The court held that the government breached the plea agreement by requiring cooperation when the agreement, as memorialized in a cover letter, explicitly stated cooperation would not be required, and that resentencing was the appropriate remedy.
• United States v. Lawson
  947 F.2d 849· 7th Cir.· 1991-11-14 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the district court's finding of an aggravating role was not clearly erroneous and that the defendant received effective assistance of counsel.
• United States v. Gutierrez
  839 F.2d 648· 10th Cir.· 1988-02-10 ·cited 9×
  The court held that a district court must provide notice before converting a motion to dismiss under Rule 9(a) into a motion for summary judgment, and that an evidentiary hearing is required if the record does not conclusively show the prisoner is entitled to no relief.
• Williams v. Smith
  591 F.2d 169· 2d Cir.· 1979-01-16 ·cited 9×
  A guilty plea entered without full knowledge of sentencing consequences is constitutionally valid if the defendant would have pleaded guilty even with accurate information.
• Rudolfo Ruiz v. United States
  494 F.2d 1· 5th Cir.· 1974-05-16 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the petitioner was adequately informed of the consequences of his guilty plea and that a sufficient factual basis for the plea was established.
• United States v. Rusel J. Jagim
  978 F.2d 1032· 8th Cir.· 1992-10-29 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences of all defendants, finding no abuse of discretion in the trial court's rulings on plea withdrawals, continuances, severances, or sentencing enhancements.
• United States v. Agrell
  965 F.2d 222· 7th Cir.· 1992-05-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the defendant's motion for mistrial, applying the Sentencing Guidelines, denying a reduction for acceptance of responsibility, or including a 1970 conviction in the criminal history category.
• United States v. Tilley
  964 F.2d 66· 1st Cir.· 1992-05-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to withdraw the guilty plea, nor did it abuse its discretion in departing upward from the sentencing guidelines.
• United States v. Adams
  961 F.2d 505· 5th Cir.· 1992-05-08 ·cited 8×·via Federal Rule Of Criminal Procedure 11(C)(1)
  The court held that while the district court failed to establish an adequate factual basis for the guilty plea to misprision of a felony, this error was harmless because the record as a whole contained sufficient evidence of affirmative concealment.
• United States v. Cordell L. Tillman
  963 F.2d 137· 6th Cir.· 1992-05-06 ·cited 8×·via Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(A)(2)
  The court held that the defendant's consent to search was not voluntary due to coercive circumstances, and the Miranda warnings provided were inadequate, requiring suppression of statements and evidence.
• United States v. Arnita Trussel and James Barker
  961 F.2d 685· 7th Cir.· 1992-04-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a defendant's claims of confusion and ineffective counsel regarding an entrapment defense were insufficient to require an evidentiary hearing for withdrawal of a guilty plea, especially when contradicted by Rule 11 statements. The court also affirmed sentencin
• Stewart v. Peters
  958 F.2d 1379· 7th Cir.· 1992-02-27 ·cited 8×
  A guilty plea is voluntary and intelligent if the defendant understands the rights they are waiving and the consequences of the plea, even if the record lacks explicit admissions or detailed explanations of statutory elements.
• United States v. Parra-Ibanez
  936 F.2d 588· 1st Cir.· 1991-06-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court's Rule 11 colloquy was insufficient for failing to inquire further into the effects of the defendant's medications on his ability to enter a knowing and voluntary plea.
• United States v. Rosen
  929 F.2d 839· 1st Cir.· 1991-04-05 ·cited 8×·via Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(A)(2)
  The court held that the defendant was accountable for the full quantity of marijuana knowingly accepted, and that the district court did not err in denying suppression motions or dismissing the indictment for outrageous conduct.
• United States v. Badger
  925 F.2d 101· 5th Cir.· 1991-02-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty pleas or in finding he was not a minimal or minor participant, but erred in imposing a mandatory three-year supervised release term based on misinformation.
• United States v. Briggs
  920 F.2d 287· 5th Cir.· 1991-01-04 ·cited 8×·via Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(F)
  A guilty plea to bank fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1344 requires a factual basis demonstrating the defendant defrauded a financial institution or obtained funds by false pretenses; a plea lacking such basis can be vacated, and the defendant may be allowed to plead anew.
• United States v. Williams
  919 F.2d 1451· 10th Cir.· 1990-11-26 ·cited 8×
  A guilty plea is voluntary if the defendant understands the court is not bound by sentencing recommendations, even if attorneys provide an estimated range. Sentencing guideline calculations are reviewed for error, but harmless errors do not warrant reversal.
• United States v. Sherrie Tuggle Apple
  915 F.2d 899· 4th Cir.· 1990-10-02 ·cited 8×·via Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(A)(2)
  The court held that Stacy Apple lacked standing to challenge electronic surveillance due to insufficient evidence of his involvement, but Sherrie Apple made a sufficient showing, and the government's denial was inadequate. The court also remanded sentencing issues regarding firea
• United States v. White
  912 F.2d 754· 5th Cir.· 1990-09-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Sentencing Guideline § 1B1.2 does not deprive a defendant of the effective assistance of counsel, nor does it violate Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
• United States v. Alvarez-Quiroga
  901 F.2d 1433· 7th Cir.· 1990-05-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a district judge is not required by Rule 11 to inform a defendant of the Sentencing Guidelines range before accepting a guilty plea, and that the defendant failed to show a fair and just reason to withdraw his plea.
• Long v. United States
  883 F.2d 966· 11th Cir.· 1989-09-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a defendant is not entitled to relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 for a Fed.R.Crim.P. 11 violation if the misstatement was unintentional and the defendant cannot show prejudice.
• United States v. Green
  882 F.2d 999· 5th Cir.· 1989-09-12 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the denial of the defendant's motion to vacate his sentence, finding no merit in his claims of jurisdictional error, ineffective assistance of counsel, Rule 11 violations, or government breach of the plea agreement.
• The United States v. Kordosky
  878 F.2d 991· 7th Cir.· 1989-06-28 ·cited 8×·via Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(A)(2)
  The court held that the search incident to arrest was legal because the arresting officer had probable cause, and the inventory search was lawful as it followed standard police procedures.
• United States v. Pogue
  865 F.2d 226· 10th Cir.· 1989-01-12 ·cited 8×·via Federal Rule Of Criminal Procedure 11(C)(1)
  The court held that a Rule 11 violation regarding the failure to inform a defendant of the possibility of restitution can warrant vacatur of a sentence if the defendant demonstrates prejudice and a credible explanation for not raising the issue earlier.
• United States v. Kettering
  861 F.2d 675· 11th Cir.· 1988-12-08 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a DEA agent's statements during plea negotiations do not create an enforceable agreement if the agent lacks authority to bind the prosecution and the defendant does not detrimentally rely on the representations.
• United States v. Rossillo
  853 F.2d 1062· 2d Cir.· 1988-08-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea was properly denied because the plea was entered voluntarily and knowingly, despite claims of a heart condition affecting his understanding.
• United States v. Billington
  844 F.2d 445· 7th Cir.· 1988-04-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a defendant cannot compel specific performance of a plea agreement provision that requires the government to withhold relevant sentencing information from the court, as such a provision is illegal and against public policy. The defendant's voluntary ratificati
• Phillips v. A.I. Murphy and Michael Turpen
  796 F.2d 1303· 10th Cir.· 1986-07-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a federal evidentiary hearing was not required because the petitioner's claims were incredible and unsupported by specifics, and the state court's findings of historical fact were entitled to a presumption of correctness. The court also held that the failure t
• United States v. Anibal Sarmiento
  786 F.2d 665· 5th Cir.· 1986-04-04 ·cited 8×·via Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(A)(2)
  The court held that the defendant was not entitled to an entrapment jury instruction and that his conditional guilty plea, despite being improperly based on an appealable pretrial matter, was not grounds to withdraw the plea.
• United States v. Trott
  779 F.2d 912· 3d Cir.· 1985-12-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a guilty plea is valid if entered knowingly and voluntarily with an adequate factual basis, and withdrawal is within the trial court's discretion absent a compelling reason.
• United States v. Schuster
  734 F.2d 424· 9th Cir.· 1984-06-04 ·cited 8×
  A trial court is not required to advise a defendant of their right to confrontation before accepting a waiver of jury trial and submission of guilt determination on stipulated facts, if the stipulation does not conclusively demonstrate guilt.