United States v. Pagan-Ortega

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that not even a Rule 11 violation, let alone a constitutional violation, occurred when defendant was not informed of his right to a unanimous jury as part of his plea colloquy
• finding no plain error where the district court had much heavier involvement in plea negotiations
• finding a \two month lag between the plea hearing and appellant's motion to withdraw place[d] it well within the area of vulnerability because of untimeliness\
• \The two month lag between the plea hearing and appellant's motion to withdraw places it well within the area of vulnerability because of untimeliness.\
• pursuant to the \very considerable\ plain error standard of review, the trial court's comments regarding a \super break\ and \good deal\ during the change of plea hearing \related to a factual and compelling comparison with the risk of conviction following a trial.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).