700 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 130 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort
-
260 F.2d 910·
5th Cir.·
1958-11-05
·cited 22×
The court held that the files and records conclusively show the prisoner is entitled to no relief, affirming the denial of the motion to vacate sentence.
-
792 F.2d 1541·
11th Cir.·
1986-07-07
·cited 21×
The dissenting judge would hold that the district court's failure to inform the petitioner of his right to withdraw his guilty plea if the court did not accept the plea agreement rendered the plea proceeding fundamentally unfair.
-
766 F.2d 1095·
7th Cir.·
1985-07-03
·cited 21×
The court held that the district court failed to comply with Rule 11 by not adequately informing the defendant of the nature of the conspiracy charge, and this error was not harmless. However, the failure to explain the mail fraud charges was harmless error.
-
642 F.2d 165·
5th Cir.·
1981-04-10
·cited 21×
The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea.
-
A voluntarily entered guilty plea forecloses a defendant's right to object to the manner of arrest or evidence seizure.
-
822 F.2d 739·
8th Cir.·
1987-06-25
·cited 20×
A plea agreement is implicitly conditioned on the district court's acceptance; rejection of the agreement by the court discharges both parties from their obligations.
-
The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the defendant waived claims regarding the plea agreement abrogation and Rule 11 hearing by not raising them properly below, and that the ineffective assistance of counsel claim must be raised in the district court first.
-
804 F.2d 1204·
11th Cir.·
1986-11-24
·cited 20×
The court held that the trial court adequately ensured the defendant understood the charges and voluntarily pleaded guilty, despite initial ambiguities in the colloquy.
-
634 F.2d 1295·
10th Cir.·
1980-11-18
·cited 20×
Double jeopardy does not bar trial on Count I because the case involves a single prosecution, not successive prosecutions, and the defendant's guilty plea to Count II was a voluntary choice made with knowledge of the government's intent to proceed on Count I.
-
The court should affirm the denial of the petition because McCord's allegations of a broken plea agreement are uncorroborated.
-
565 F.2d 356·
5th Cir.·
1978-01-03
·cited 20×
The court held that the district court properly rejected the defendant's contentions regarding double jeopardy and cruel and unusual punishment.
-
543 F.2d 1090·
4th Cir.·
1976-11-08
·cited 20×
A defendant is entitled to plead anew if a district court accepts his guilty plea without fully adhering to the procedure provided for in Rule 11, as amended.
-
481 F.2d 1035·
8th Cir.·
1973-07-25
·cited 20×
The court held that the amended 18 U.S.C. § 3731 grants the government the right to appeal a district court's dismissal of an indictment, except in cases where double jeopardy prohibits further prosecution. The dismissal in this case, based on the government's failure to provide
-
468 F.2d 769·
9th Cir.·
1972-10-19
·cited 20×
A district court does not abuse its discretion by denying a motion to withdraw a guilty plea when the defendant's asserted reason for withdrawal lacks credibility and is contradicted by evidence.
-
462 F.2d 1033·
10th Cir.·
1972-07-05
·cited 20×
The court held that the government's suppression of evidence regarding a key witness's plea bargain, even if unintentional, rendered the trial fundamentally unfair and violated due process.
-
465 F.2d 438·
5th Cir.·
1972-01-24
·cited 20×
The court held that a defendant's voluntary in-court testimony, even if inculpatory, does not trigger the mandatory warnings and inquiries required for guilty pleas under Rule 11.
-
449 F.2d 313·
5th Cir.·
1971-10-20
·cited 20×
A valid guilty plea waives all non-jurisdictional defects in prior proceedings, including the defense of insanity.
-
447 F.2d 207·
5th Cir.·
1971-07-13
·cited 20×
The court held that Boykin v. Alabama, requiring inquiry into the voluntariness of guilty pleas, is not retroactive to pleas entered before its decision.
-
440 F.2d 1043·
8th Cir.·
1971-03-29
·cited 20×
The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the appellant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea, as Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure was properly followed.
-
432 F.2d 35·
9th Cir.·
1970-09-18
·cited 20×
The court held that the district court erred in denying an evidentiary hearing on the petitioner's claim of being coerced into a guilty plea by physical abuse from law enforcement officers.
-
413 F.2d 878·
9th Cir.·
1969-06-27
·cited 20×
The dissenting judge would allow the petitioner to amend his claim regarding the aggravated offense and hold a hearing if sufficient facts are alleged, as the record is not conclusive.
-
413 F.2d 967·
2d Cir.·
1969-06-09
·cited 20×
The court held that the procedure for accepting the guilty plea did not satisfy Rule 11's requirements regarding the factual basis for the plea.
-
252 F.2d 460·
10th Cir.·
1958-01-27
·cited 20×
The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellants' motions to withdraw their guilty pleas, as the pleas were entered voluntarily and with understanding of their rights.
-
588 F.2d 395·
3d Cir.·
1978-11-27
·cited 19×
The court held that the Interstate Agreement on Detainers was not violated because the transfer was under a writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum, but reversed the denial of a hearing on the voluntariness of the guilty plea based on alleged attorney misrepresentations.
-
569 F.2d 199·
3d Cir.·
1977-12-29
·cited 19×
The court held that the trial court erred in placing the burden of proving incompetency on the habeas petitioner when the issue of competency was raised but not litigated prior to conviction.
-
961 F.2d 1268·
7th Cir.·
1992-04-14
·cited 18×
The court held that the district court did not err in denying the defendant's motions to strike the Presentence Report and withdraw his guilty plea, nor in its sentencing determination.
-
The court held that the district court abused its discretion by failing to establish a sufficient factual basis for the guilty plea to misprision of a felony, rendering the plea unknowing.
-
A notice of appeal filed after a conditional guilty plea but before sentencing is sufficient to confer appellate jurisdiction if the intent to appeal is clear and neither party is prejudiced.
-
The court held that the trial court properly denied the motion to dismiss the indictment but that its findings regarding the independent nature of certain evidence were inadequate, requiring a remand for further evidentiary hearings.
-
779 F.2d 1139·
5th Cir.·
1986-01-08
·cited 18×
The court held that the district court's failure to explicitly inform the defendant of his right to confront witnesses did not constitute reversible error, as the core concerns of Rule 11 were met and the error was harmless.
-
729 F.2d 1512·
8th Cir.·
1984-03-28
·cited 18×
A sentence is not subject to review unless it exceeds statutory limits, violates constitutional or procedural requirements, or reflects a manifest abuse of discretion.
-
721 F.2d 703·
10th Cir.·
1983-11-14
·cited 18×
The court held that the defendant should have been permitted to withdraw his guilty pleas because the prosecution failed to inform the court of a plea agreement, violating Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
-
681 F.2d 589·
9th Cir.·
1982-07-12
·cited 18×
Reinstatement of an indictment after a defendant successfully withdraws a guilty plea is not barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause, nor does it constitute prosecutorial vindictiveness.
-
674 F.2d 1122·
5th Cir.·
1982-05-07
·cited 18×
The court held that the defendant's guilty plea was knowingly and voluntarily made in compliance with Rule 11, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to withdraw the plea.
-
The court held that a guilty plea induced by counsel's legal opinion on the effect of a plea agreement, rather than a misrepresentation of the agreement's terms, does not render the plea involuntary. The court also found no violation of the plea agreement regarding parole opposit
-
523 F.2d 1220·
5th Cir.·
1975-11-21
·cited 18×
The court held that the district court erred in denying the motion to vacate without an evidentiary hearing, given the ambiguity of the sentencing judge's letter and the unusual language used to impose consecutive sentences.
-
516 F.2d 293·
2d Cir.·
1975-03-17
·cited 18×
A district judge abused discretion by rejecting a guilty plea solely based on the defendant's allocution, when a factual basis existed in other evidence and the court misunderstood its duty under Rule 11 to conduct an independent inquiry.
-
500 F.2d 42·
10th Cir.·
1974-07-22
·cited 18×
The court held that the trial court adequately complied with Rule 11 requirements when accepting the defendant's guilty plea, and that methadone treatment did not render the defendant incompetent.
-
397 F.2d 446·
7th Cir.·
1968-06-18
·cited 18×
The court held that the district judge properly denied the defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea, as the plea was not involuntary due to judicial or marshal conduct, nor was Rule 11 violated.
-
403 F.2d 928·
D.C. Cir.·
1968-05-20
·cited 18×
The court held that evidence of narcotics use alone is insufficient to prove incompetence to enter a guilty plea, and the trial court did not err by failing to sua sponte order a competency hearing without sufficient indication of the defendant's current impairment.
-
362 F.2d 931·
3d Cir.·
1966-05-17
·cited 18×
The court held that a hearing must be granted when a motion to vacate a conviction raises a factual issue that cannot be resolved solely from the motion and case records.
-
357 F.2d 907·
7th Cir.·
1966-03-03
·cited 18×
The court held that the record did not conclusively show an intelligent waiver of counsel or an understanding guilty plea, requiring a hearing.
-
339 F.2d 519·
8th Cir.·
1964-12-30
·cited 18×
The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion to vacate the sentence, finding that the plea was entered voluntarily with understanding and that counsel was effective.
-
920 F.2d 538·
8th Cir.·
1990-12-04
·cited 17×
A district court cannot modify an unconditionally accepted plea agreement under Rule 11, absent fraud, and contract law analogies do not permit reformation for unilateral mistake. Factual findings supporting an upward adjustment for a leadership role under the Sentencing Guidelin
-
579 F.2d 364·
5th Cir.·
1978-09-01
·cited 17×
The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to vacate sentence because the appellant failed to meet his burden of proof.
-
942 F.2d 1217·
7th Cir.·
1991-09-16
·cited 16×
The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea, denying his motion for a continuance, or refusing to grant a reduction for acceptance of responsibility.
-
933 F.2d 742·
9th Cir.·
1991-05-15
·cited 16×
A district court cannot depart downward from a sentence under the Sentencing Guidelines based on factors already adequately considered by the Sentencing Commission, such as remoteness of prior convictions, parole violations, or drug dependency, unless specific exceptions apply.
-
921 F.2d 580·
5th Cir.·
1991-01-09
·cited 16×
The court held that the district court's failure to personally admonish the defendant regarding the nature of the charges and its reliance on unreliable information for sentencing warranted reversal.
-
The dissenting judge believes the trial judge's conclusion of exigent circumstances was supported by the record, warranting affirmance.
-
900 F.2d 919·
6th Cir.·
1990-04-09
·cited 16×
The court held that restitution can only be ordered for victims of the offenses of conviction, not for dismissed counts, and that the district court's restitution orders were too broad. The court also found the district court's financial hearings sufficient and the sentences impo