Court : US Supreme Court
..... to appellate division of the supreme court of new york, first judicial department syllabus after negotiations with the prosecutor, petitioner withdrew his previous not-guilty plea to two felony counts and pleaded guilty to a lesser included offense, the prosecutor having agreed to make no recommendation as to sentence. ..... sorts of promises by prosecutors tend to be coercive, but in order to assist appellate review in weighing promises in light of all the circumstances, all trial courts are now required to interrogate the defendants who enter guilty pleas so that the waiver of these fundamental rights will affirmatively appear in the record. ..... in the course of holding that withdrawn guilty pleas were not admissible in subsequent federal prosecutions, the court opined: "[o]n timely application, the court will vacate a plea of guilty shown to have been unfairly obtained or given through ignorance, ..... this and other federal rights may be waived through a guilty plea, but such waivers are not lightly presumed, and, in fact, are viewed with the ..... where the government itself has broken the plea bargain, this disappointment cannot bar petitioner from withdrawing his guilty plea and reclaiming his right to a trial ..... state convictions founded upon coerced or unfairly induced guilty pleas have also received increased scrutiny as more fundamental rights have been applied ..... although kercheval's dictum concerning grounds for withdrawal of guilty pleas did not expressly rest on constitutional grounds ( .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... at all relevant times in this action, petitioner claimed that he should have been permitted to withdraw his guilty plea before sentencing because his lawyer was not rendering satisfactory representation. ..... before sentencing, petitioner stated that he was innocent, and sought to vacate his guilty plea so that he could proceed to trial with new counsel in whom he had confidence. ..... as justice douglas has recently reminded us, "however important plea bargaining may be in the administration of criminal justice, our opinions have established that a guilty plea is a serious and sobering occasion, inasmuch as it constitutes a waiver of the fundamental rights to a jury trial, duncan v. ..... thus, i agree with the court that the petitioner's claim should be evaluated under the standards governing an attack on a guilty plea made after judgment, not under the far different standards governing a motion to withdraw a plea made before judgment has been pronounced. ..... a defendant may waive his constitutional rights through a guilty plea, but such waivers are not quickly presumed, and, in fact, are viewed with the "utmost solicitude. ..... any requirement that a defendant prove the "merit" of his reason for undoing this waiver would confuse the obvious difference between the withdrawal of a guilty plea before the government has relied on the plea to its disadvantage and a later challenge to such a plea, on appeal or collaterally, when the judgment is final and the government clearly has relied on the plea. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... -771, the court laid down the general rule by which federal collateral attacks on convictions based on guilty pleas rendered with the advice of counsel were to be governed: "in our view, a defendant's plea of guilty based on reasonably competent advice is an intelligent plea not open to attack on the ground that counsel may have misjudged the admissibility of the defendant's ..... have before us all of the papers dealing with respondent's previous federal habeas petitions, we are not in a position to say whether he is presently precluded from raising the issue of the voluntary and intelligent nature of his guilty plea, or whether that claim would be open to him on appropriate allegations in a new or amended petition. ..... concluded in each case that the issue was not the merits of these constitutional claims as such, but rather whether the guilty plea had been made intelligently and voluntarily with the advice of competent counsel. ..... as infirmities in the grand jury selection process, but may only attack the voluntary and intelligent character of the guilty plea by showing that counsel's advice was not within the standards of mcmann v. ..... those cases, the court held that a guilty plea, intelligently and voluntarily made, barred the assertion of later claims that, at some point in the pretrial process, an admission of guilt had been unconstitutionally extracted, either through a coerced confession or through a plea of guilty induced by fear of enhanced punishment if such a plea were not made. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... thus, here where a new york statute permitted an appeal from an adverse decision on a motion to suppress evidence allegedly obtained as a result of unlawful search and seizure though the conviction was based on a guilty plea, respondent, who had been convicted in state court on a guilty plea to a drug charge and who had unsuccessfully presented to the state courts on direct appeal his federal constitutional claim that evidence seized incident to an unlawful arrest should have been suppressed, was not ..... context that newsome may not litigate his fourth amendment claim in federal court, then, once those who counsel defendants in the new york court system read the opinion, it would be incontestable that a guilty plea in new york would foreclose federal habeas corpus relief based on already rejected fourth amendment claims, and that no defendant might legitimately harbor "expectations" to the contrary. ..... precluding review of independent claims relating to the deprivation of constitutional rights that occurred prior to the entry of his "guilty plea," newsome's plea carried with it the guarantee that judicial review of his constitutional claims would continue to be available to him. ..... 2/3 ] the question raised in this case, therefore, is whether, if a state chooses to open its appellate courts to hear claims of constitutional deprivations preceding entry of a guilty plea and to set aside the plea if the antecedent violation is established, the state thereby creates a federal page 420 u. s. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... subsequently, after exhausting his state remedies in an unsuccessful attempt to have his conviction vacated on the ground that his guilty plea was involuntary, respondent filed a habeas corpus petition in federal district court, alleging that his guilty plea was involuntary because, inter alia, he was not aware that intent to cause death was an element of second-degree murder ..... the court of appeals reversed summarily and directed the district court "to conduct an evidentiary hearing on the issues raised by petitioner, including whether, at the time of his entry of his guilty plea, he was aware that intent was an essential element of the crime and was advised of the scope of the punishment that might be imposed. ..... 755 (1970), the court, in dealing with a pre- mccarthy guilty plea, held that the "standard as to the voluntariness of guilty pleas" is that "" [a] plea of guilty entered by one fully aware of the direct consequences, including the actual value of any commitments made to him by the court, prosecutor, or his own counsel, must stand unless induced by threats (or promises to discontinue improper harassment), ..... the defendant did not expressly admit that he intended the victim's death (such intent being an element of the crime for which he stands convicted); and his plea of guilty cannot be construed as an implied admission that he intended her death, because the district court has found that he was not told and did not know that intent to kill was an element of the offense .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... fact that he was questioned by the trial judge prior to sentencing, but as he thought he was only going to get ten years, and had been instructed to answer the questions, so that the court would accept the guilty plea, this fact does not preclude him from raising this matter, especially since he was not given the promised sentence by the court." " * * * *" ". . . ..... after unsuccessfully exhausting a state collateral remedy, respondent sought a writ of habeas corpus in a federal district court, claiming that his guilty plea had been induced by the promise of his attorney, who presumably had consulted with the judge and solicitor, that he would get only a 10-year sentence. ..... in the light of the nature of the record of the proceeding at which the guilty plea was accepted, and of the ambiguous status of the process of plea bargaining at the time the guilty plea was made, we conclude that allison's petition should not have been summarily dismissed. ..... held: in light of the nature of the record of the proceeding at which the guilty plea was accepted, and of the ambiguous status of the process of plea bargaining at the time the guilty plea was made, respondent's petition for a writ of habeas corpus should not have been summarily dismissed. pp. ..... [ footnote 17 ] in 1973, the north carolina legislature enacted a comprehensive set of procedures governing disposition by guilty plea and plea arrangement, modeled after the ali model code of pre-arraignment procedure, art. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... justice stone's opinion for the unanimous court in lindsey also disposes of appellee's argument that the statute here is distinguishable from the one in jackson because it does not make death the consequence of a "false" not-guilty plea: when "a punishment for murder of life imprisonment or death [is] changed to death alone," it is "only a more striking instance of the detriment which ensues from the revision of a statute providing for a maximum and a minimum ..... appellee is correct in its assertion that the statute has been effective as a money-saving inducement to guilty pleas, that success is necessarily attributable to the deterrent effect of the penalty imposed on those who resist ..... bordenkircher, like other cases here, unequivocally recognized the state's legitimate interest in encouraging the entry of guilty pleas and in facilitating plea bargaining, a process mutually beneficial to both the defendant and the state. ..... the situation in an ideal world, the fact is that the guilty plea and the often concomitant plea bargain are important components of this country's criminal justice system. ..... the court intimated as much in jackson itself: "[t]he evil in the federal statute is not that it necessarily coerces guilty pleas and jury waivers, but simply that it needlessly encourages them. ..... absent the abolition of guilty pleas and plea bargaining, it is not forbidden under the constitution to extend a proper degree of leniency in return for guilty pleas, and new jersey has done no more .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... from the record of this proceeding and from the record of the pretrial hearing in the instant case that the trial court did not err in ruling that appellant's guilty plea was voluntarily and knowingly made, and that the evidence of the prior conviction should be submitted to the jury." id. at a-42 ..... factual determinations arising from the ohio trial court proceedings which were "fairly supported by the record" within the meaning of 2254(d), this court cannot accept the court of appeals' conclusion that respondent's guilty plea to the illinois charge was not voluntary and knowing in the constitutional meaning of those terms. pp ..... conviction, the ohio court of appeals held that the specification based on the prior illinois conviction was adequately proved, and that the trial court did not err in ruling that respondent's guilty plea in the illinois court was knowing and voluntary, and should be submitted to the jury. ..... questions of historical fact which have dogged this case from its inception -- what the illinois records show with respect to respondent's 1972 guilty plea, what other inferences regarding those historical facts the court of page 459 u. s ..... appeals for the sixth circuit granted respondent's habeas petition solely on the ground that the illinois conviction admitted in evidence at his ohio trial had been obtained unconstitutionally, because respondent had entered a guilty plea without notice that he was pleading guilty to an attempted murder charge as well as an aggravated battery charge .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... the district court denied the motion, but the court of appeals reversed, holding that, notwithstanding their guilty pleas, respondents were entitled to introduce evidence outside the original record to support their one-conspiracy claim, since, in pleading guilty, they admitted only the acts described in the indictments, not their legal consequences, and that, moreover, since the indictments did not expressly state that the two conspiracies ..... majority reads the particular circumstances of those cases as compelling, or even implying, that the need for an evidentiary hearing alters the effect of a guilty plea, it infuses mere happenstance with constitutional meaning and draws distinctions where none belong. ..... the truth of many of the relevant facts will have been established by the guilty plea to the first indictment, and the legal sufficiency and independence of the second indictment should be ..... the well-settled principle that a voluntary and intelligent guilty plea by an accused who has been advised by competent counsel may not be collaterally attacked, respondents, who have not called into question the voluntary and intelligent character of their pleas, were not entitled to the collateral relief they ..... challenge similar to the one here, the hearing probably would involve only the government's explanation of how the conduct charged in the second indictment differs from the facts established by the guilty plea to the first indictment, and the defendants' arguments to the contrary. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
..... respondent's arguments-that the "fair and just reason" standard was not meant to apply to guilty pleas conditioned on acceptance of the plea agreement, and that the advisory committee's notes to rule 32(b)(3) support the court of appeals' holding-are rejected. ..... instead, they explicitly envision a situation in which the defendant performs his side of the bargain (the guilty plea) before the government is required to perform its side (here, the motion to dismiss four counts ..... " this rule obviously does not deal at all with motions to withdraw guilty pleas, and any comments in the advisory committee's notes to this rule dealing with plea withdrawal could not alter the meaning of rules 11 and 32(e) as we have ..... withdrawal automatic in every case where the defendant decided to alter his tactics and present his theory of the case to the jury, the guilty plea would become a mere gesture, a temporary and meaningless formality reversible at the defendant's whim. ..... second, the guilty plea and the plea agreement are" 'inextricably bound up together,'" such that the court's deferral of the decision whether to accept the plea agreement also constitutes an automatic deferral of its decision whether to accept the guilty plea, even if the court explicitly states that it is accepting the guilty plea. 92 ..... speculation that the advisory committee, this court, and congress had the kercheval view of a guilty plea in mind when rule 32(e) was amended in 1983 is thus contradicted by the rules themselves. .....
Tag this Judgment!