Michael Alan Pitts v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “affirmative misstatements of the maximum possible sentence” are sufficient to invalidate a guilty plea if the misstatements are material to defendant’s decision to plead guilty
• reciting numerous cases finding that withdrawal of defendant’s plea was appropriate in light of counsel’s misadvice concerning sentence exposure, both when counsel overstated and understated defendant’s possible sentence
• court noted that the petitioner was suffering the ongoing disability of an enhanced state court sentence in finding coram nobis relief appropriate
• “[This case] involves affirmative misstatements of the maximum possible sentence. Numerous cases have held that misunderstandings of this nature invalidate a guilty plea.”
• on habeas review, “that Boykin was not fully complied with, however, does not end the inquiry. The ultimate question which remains is whether [petitioner’s] plea was in fact voluntary and intelligent.”
• “We stress that this case does not involve a mere failure to give a defendant some information which he later claims would have affected his pleading decision.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).