United States v. Howard E. Saft

How courts have described this case

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

• prejudice to the government may be considered by the court in the exercise of its discretion even where defendant has not shown sufficient grounds for permitting withdrawal of his plea
• prejudice to the government may be considered by the court in the exercise of its discretion even where defendant has not shown sufficient grounds for permitting withdrawal of his plea
• failure to inform defendant of one or two Rule 11 rights not requiring remand on basis of remaining record
• approach in Saft adopted by the 1983 amendment to Rule 332(d), as noted in Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(d) Advisory Committee Note at 4
• indictment read by clerk to inform defendant of the nature of the charges
• reading of indictment by court clerk may be sufficient

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).