Chapman v. Mehta

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• observing that one with multiple felony convictions “cannot plausibly argue that he did not know his conviction[s] had a maximum punishment exceeding a year.”
• requiring the same showing in the context of a constitutionally invalid plea based on Rehaif
• concluding that this error was not structural
• concluding that this error was not structural
• consulting entire district court record to assess effect of Rehaif error in plea colloquy
• rejecting Rehaif claim where the defendant “[could not] plausibly argue that he did not know his conviction had a maximum punishment exceeding a year.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).