-
269 F.3d 1250·
11th Cir.·
2001-10-17
·cited 114×
The court affirmed the convictions and sentences of the Sanchezes. The concurring judges argued that no Apprendi error occurred because the sentences did not exceed the statutory maximum under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(C). They also contended that the "Rogers error" did not apply bec
-
488 F.2d 1206·
1st Cir.·
1973-12-20
·cited 86×
The court held that a witness's prior limited testimony and guilty plea do not waive their Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination in a separate trial, and a defendant cannot compel a witness to testify before a jury solely to assert that privilege.
-
292 F.2d 483·
1st Cir.·
1961-06-29
·cited 80×
The court held that the district court erred in denying the motion to vacate the conviction without determining compliance with Fed.R.Crim.P. 11 and 32(a).
-
410 F.2d 689·
1st Cir.·
1969-05-06
·cited 76×
The court held that ineligibility for parole is a consequence of a guilty plea under Fed.R.Crim.P. 11, and the district court erred by not informing the defendant of this consequence before accepting the plea.
-
776 F.2d 965·
11th Cir.·
1985-11-21
·cited 42×
The court held that the trial court did not err in accepting the guilty plea, denying the motion to dismiss, or imposing the sentence, affirming the conviction and sentence.
-
781 F.2d 85·
6th Cir.·
1986-01-15
·cited 40×
A defendant's guilty plea is knowing and voluntary if entered into after the court scrupulously follows Rule 11 procedures, and the defendant is bound by the terms revealed in open court, absent extraordinary circumstances.
-
421 F.2d 1133·
D.C. Cir.·
1969-10-07
·cited 40×
New legal standards regarding right to counsel and hearing at waiver proceedings are not retroactively applicable to a 1961 waiver determination.
-
861 F.2d 206·
9th Cir.·
1988-11-03
·cited 39×
The court held that Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 does not require a trial court to warn a defendant of parole ineligibility before accepting a guilty plea, and that the failure to explain supervised release was harmless error.
-
417 F.2d 494·
5th Cir.·
1969-10-09
·cited 34×
A trial judge is not required to inform a defendant of their ineligibility for parole when accepting a guilty plea under Rule 11.
-
899 F.2d 1526·
6th Cir.·
1990-04-06
·cited 30×
The court held that the district court erred by failing to comply with statutory notice requirements for enhanced sentencing and by failing to resolve disputed facts in the presentence report, requiring a remand for resentencing.
-
483 F.2d 516·
8th Cir.·
1973-08-17
·cited 30×
A defendant must be fully informed of the consequences of a guilty plea, including the nature of a special parole term, before the plea is accepted.
-
868 F.2d 1379·
5th Cir.·
1989-02-14
·cited 29×
-
659 F.2d 624·
5th Cir.·
1981-10-19
·cited 29×
The court concurred that the prosecutor's actions, while overreaching, were not against the public interest given the circumstances and the defendant's subsequent honorable course of action.
-
551 F.2d 1193·
10th Cir.·
1977-03-30
·cited 28×
The court held that the trial judge did not err in handling the presentence and sentencing proceedings, and that the inclusion of arrest history and the procedure for reviewing the presentence report were permissible.
-
430 F.2d 526·
8th Cir.·
1970-08-14
·cited 28×
The court affirmed the denial of the petition for writ of error coram nobis, finding the petitioner was competent to stand trial and enter a guilty plea in 1958.
-
733 F.2d 371·
5th Cir.·
1984-06-01
·cited 27×
The court held that the appellant's guilty pleas were knowing and voluntary, and that his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel were without merit. One of the sentences was vacated under the concurrent sentence doctrine.
-
526 F.2d 708·
5th Cir.·
1976-02-02
·cited 26×
The court held that the district court's acceptance of the defendant's guilty plea was invalid because the required inquiries under Fed.R.Crim.P. 11 were made by the prosecutor, not the judge personally.
-
436 F.2d 162·
D.C. Cir.·
1970-10-01
·cited 26×
-
678 F.2d 1062·
11th Cir.·
1982-06-18
·cited 23×
The court held that the defendant's guilty plea was knowing and voluntary, despite allegations of misleading advice from FBI agents, because he was represented by counsel before pleading and affirmed his plea in court.
-
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.
-
333 F.2d 472·
10th Cir.·
1964-06-15
·cited 21×
A voluntarily entered guilty plea forecloses a defendant's right to object to the manner of arrest or evidence seizure.
-
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.
-
595 F.2d 1021·
5th Cir.·
1979-05-22
·cited 16×
A defendant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel, even if contradicted by sworn testimony at the plea colloquy, when supported by specific factual allegations and a reliable third-party affidavit.
-
435 F.2d 630·
1st Cir.·
1970-12-14
·cited 16×
A guilty plea does not waive the right to appeal the denial of a motion to dismiss for want of prosecution based on a speedy trial violation.
-
864 F.2d 1324·
7th Cir.·
1988-12-14
·cited 14×
The court held that the defendant breached his plea agreement by refusing to cooperate further, and therefore the superseding indictment should not have been dismissed.
-
844 F.2d 487·
7th Cir.·
1988-04-21
·cited 14×
The court held that the information sufficiently stated an offense, the guilty plea was valid despite minor Rule 11 deviations, and the sentence was not an abuse of discretion.
-
606 F.2d 814·
8th Cir.·
1979-10-04
·cited 14×
The court held that the appellant's guilty plea was valid and he received effective assistance of counsel, affirming the denial of his post-conviction petition.
-
583 F.2d 695·
4th Cir.·
1978-09-28
·cited 14×
The court held that a defendant need not be informed of the potential effect of 18 U.S.C.A. § 3568 as a consequence of a guilty plea under Rule 11.
-
586 F.2d 1178·
8th Cir.·
1978-10-04
·cited 12×
The court held that the district court substantially complied with Rule 11 and that the appellant's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel were unsubstantiated, affirming the denial of the motion to vacate.
-
309 F.2d 311·
7th Cir.·
1962-10-22
·cited 12×
The court held that a defendant who procures a judgment against him to be set aside may be tried anew, and that a guilty plea is understandingly entered even if the court's explanation of the charge is imperfect, provided the indictment itself is clear.
-
907 F.2d 983·
10th Cir.·
1990-07-03
·cited 10×
The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
688 F.2d 368·
5th Cir.·
1982-10-07
·cited 8×
A Rule 35(a) motion to correct an illegal sentence cannot be used to re-examine errors occurring prior to the imposition of sentence, and issues not raised in the district court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal.
-
553 F.2d 922·
5th Cir.·
1977-06-09
·cited 8×
The court held that the district court's failure to strictly follow Fed.R.Crim.P. 11 in accepting the appellant's guilty plea warrants reversal of the conviction.
-
382 F.2d 96·
10th Cir.·
1967-08-24
·cited 8×
A voluntary and unqualified guilty plea waives all non-jurisdictional defects, precluding appeal of prior rulings.
-
987 F.2d 833·
D.C. Cir.·
1993-03-19
·cited 6×
The court affirmed the denial of the defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea, finding no abuse of discretion by the district court.
-
923 F.2d 917·
1st Cir.·
1991-01-23
·cited 6×
A guilty plea is not knowing and intelligent if the defendant is not informed of all essential elements of the charged offense, particularly when the court and prosecution also appear to misunderstand the jurisdictional requirements.
-
918 F.2d 627·
6th Cir.·
1990-11-06
·cited 6×
The court affirmed the denial of the motion to correct the judgment and commitment order, finding that Rule 36 relief is limited to clerical errors and that the defendant's claims were not properly raised or meritorious.
-
817 F.2d 470·
8th Cir.·
1987-05-04
·cited 6×
The court held that a Rule 11 violation regarding restitution notice is not grounds for withdrawal of a guilty plea if the defendant cannot show prejudice or that they would have pleaded differently.
-
738 F.2d 246·
8th Cir.·
1984-06-27
·cited 6×
The court held that the district court did not err in denying the defendant's motion to vacate his sentence without an evidentiary hearing, as the files and records conclusively showed he was entitled to no relief.
-
602 F.2d 215·
9th Cir.·
1979-08-13
·cited 6×
The court held that a defendant cannot withdraw a guilty plea based on a technical violation of Fed.R.Crim.P. 11 if they were aware of the special parole term and do not claim they would not have pleaded guilty had they been properly advised.
-
638 F.2d 460·
2d Cir.·
1980-11-03
·cited 4×
The court held that the arrest was constitutional, the search of the apartment was consensual, and the guilty plea was knowing and voluntary.
-
572 F.2d 1284·
8th Cir.·
1978-04-13
·cited 4×
The court held that the failure to advise a defendant of the maximum possible special parole term does not constitute manifest injustice required to withdraw a guilty plea if the defendant was informed of the maximum imprisonment penalty.
-
565 F.2d 548·
8th Cir.·
1977-11-30
·cited 4×
The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to vacate the sentence without an evidentiary hearing because the record conclusively showed the prisoner was entitled to no relief.
-
590 F.2d 1338·
5th Cir.·
1979-03-08
·cited 2×
The court held that the trial court failed to comply with Fed.R.Crim.P. 11 by not informing the defendant of the nature of the offense charged.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-27
The court held that the petitioner's counsel provided effective assistance and that his guilty plea was knowing and voluntary, despite claims of inadequate advice regarding sentencing.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-02-26
Darryl Cleon Forbes, a Jamaican citizen, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud for operating a fraudulent sweepstakes scheme that defrauded U.S. victims of millions of dollars, and challenged his conviction through a § 2255 motion arguing his indictment charged a non-