Examining Rule 11(b)(1)(n) Error: Guilty Pleas, Appellate Waiver, and Dominguez Benitez [Dagger]

By Minix, Leanna C. | Washington and Lee Law Review, Winter 2017 | Go to article overview

Examining Rule 11(b)(1)(n) Error: Guilty Pleas, Appellate Waiver, and Dominguez Benitez [Dagger]


Minix, Leanna C., Washington and Lee Law Review


I. Introduction..........552

II. Receiving the Guilty Plea...........

A. Voluntary and Intelligent Requirement...........555

B. Procedural Requirement: Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure ..........560

III.Appealing the Guilty Plea...........562

A. Appellate Rights...........562

B. Appellate Waivers...........566

C. Plain Error Review: Affecting Substantial Rights...........569

D. United States v. Dominguez Benitez: Rule 11 and the Objective Test..........572

IV.Federal Courts of Appeals' Application of Dominguez Benitez to Rule 11(b)(1)(N) Errors: Where the Confusion Arises.........575

A.Circuits that Apply Only the Objective Test.........578

B. Circuits that Claim to Apply Only the Objective Test..........579

C. Circuits that Apply a Voluntariness and Intelligence Inquiry..........586

V. Argument for Adopting the Two-Part Inquiry: The Purpose of Rule 11(b)(1)(N) and the Effects of Adding the Voluntariness and Intelligence Inquiry..........596

VI. Conclusion.........605

I. Introduction

In our modern justice system, over ninety-five percent of federal criminal cases result in guilty pleas.1 Guilty pleas are often the product of direct bargaining between the prosecutor and defense counsel about the charges against the defendant and the punishment the prosecution seeks, although a defendant may choose to plead guilty without any commitment from the prosecution.2 The widespread and commonplace role of guilty pleas3 in the criminal justice system has far-reaching effects on the rights of defendants, including the constitutional right to a jury trial, the right to counsel, and the privilege against selfincrimination.4 In particular, appeal waivers prevent a defendant from appealing parts of his conviction, often including his sentence.5 Because the right to appeal exists in a legal purgatory, lingering somewhere above a purely statutory right but not rising to the level of a constitutionally guaranteed right,6 appeal waivers draw concerns about lack of procedural fairness and abuse by prosecutors and defense counsel alike.7

Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 118 provides the advisements and questions that a judge must include in his determination that the defendant is entering a valid guilty plea.9 Rule 11(b)(1)(N)10 requires that the judge determine on the record that the defendant understands he waives his right to future appeals.11 This Note advocates that Rule 11(b)(1)(N) is unique because it concerns appellate waiver.12 As such, when a judge deviates from the rule, the standard of review should not be only the objective standard articulated in United States v. Dominguez Benitez,13 which concerned a different Rule 11 violation.14 Instead, appellate courts should add a voluntariness and intelligence inquiry for review of Rule 11(b)(1)(N) errors.15

Many federal circuit courts already conduct the additional voluntary and intelligent inquiry when examining Rule 11(b)(1)(N) errors.16 However, the circuits lack uniformity in articulation and application, such that a split of authority arises between the courts over the method of analysis and standard of review.17 Without consistency among the circuits, defendants fare differently in challenging the enforceability of their appellate waivers, which are meant to prevent an appellate court from hearing appeals on the merits.18 Expressly adopting the voluntariness and intelligence inquiry alongside the objective standard from Dominguez Benitez ensures that the circuits reviewing plea hearing colloquies for Rule 11(b)(1)(N) errors find the same showing of prejudice.19

Part II of this Note develops the landscape of the constitutional and procedural requirements for ensuring a defendant's guilty plea is valid.20 Part III examines appellate waiver and federal case law on appealing guilty pleas and establishes the standards for plain error review of Rule 11 violations in general.21 Part IV details the various approaches of the federal circuit courts regarding review of Rule 11(b)(1)(N) errors, with a focus on the circuits that add a voluntary and intelligent inquiry to the objective standard of review. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA 8, MLA 7, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Note: primary sources have slightly different requirements for citation. Please see these guidelines for more information.

Cited article

Examining Rule 11(b)(1)(n) Error: Guilty Pleas, Appellate Waiver, and Dominguez Benitez [Dagger]
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen
Items saved from this article
  • Highlights & Notes
  • Citations
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA 8, MLA 7, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Search by... Author
    Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.