United States v. Erwin Darrell Newman

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Fed.R.Crim.P. 11 is not binding on a state court
• noting that defendant failed to cite any authority that a factual predicate is required in state court by the Constitution
• distinguishing between requirements of Rule 11 and the constitutional requirement that defendant’s plea be knowing and voluntary
• noting \presumption of regularity\ as to final judgments when judgments subject to collateral attack
• distinguishing between the factual determinations concerning a prior conviction, which are reviewed for clear error, and the legal determination that the conviction is within the scope of the Sentencing Guidelines, which is reviewed de novo
• preponderance standard applies generally to defendant's burden of establishing invalidity of prior conviction under the Guidelines

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).