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. TRAVIS ELMER RUSHING, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

PER CURIAM:

On this direct appeal, a review of the record indicates that the district court failed to comply with Rule 11, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, in that no inquiry was made of defendant to determine whether there was a factual basis for the plea of guilty. The failure of the court below to comply with Rule 11 constituted reversible error entitling the defendant to plead anew. See McCarthy v. United States, 1969, 394 U.S. 459, 89 S.Ct. 1166, 22 L.Ed.2d 418.

Reversed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

UNITED STATES v. RUSHING
(May 23, 1972)