Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, v. RAYMOND LEE TAYLOR, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

PER CURIAM:

The defendant contends that the trial judge failed to comply with F.R.Cr.P. 11(d) because he did not personally address defendant and determine that his guilty plea was "voluntary." The judge asked defendant if his plea was made "of his own free will and accord." The choice of different words having the same meaning is of no consequence.

While we do not base our decision on it, the judge asked defense counsel if the plea was voluntary, and he responded that it was. By other questions addressed to defendant and answered by him, the judge established that defendant had been neither threatened, coerced pressured, or extended promises, and that he was pleading guilty because he was guilty and for no other reason.

The government's argument that alleged failure to comply with Rule 11 can be only raised by § 2255 is without merit. See U.S. v. Coronado, 554 F.2d 166 (CA5), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 870, 98 S.Ct. 214, 54 L.Ed.2d 149 (1977).

AFFIRMED.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

UNITED STATES v. TAYLOR
(Nov 2, 1978)