United States v. Wollin

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a magistrate judge’s plain error in failing to inform a defendant that a 15-year minimum mandatory armed career criminal sentence applied, in combination with a Rehaif error, affected the defendant’s substantial rights
• holding that a misstatement of the maximum penalty prejudiced a defendant when, among other things, he was in fact sentenced to a term of imprisonment longer than that described during the Rule 11 hearing
• noting that these errors “in the aggregate” were “sufficient to undermine confidence in the proceeding,” but emphasizing that the court was not deciding “whether a standalone Rehaif error requires automatic vacatur of a defendant’s plea”
• vacating a guilty plea in part because the magistrate judge erred by not telling a defendant that he was subject to an enhancement
• explaining a defendant will only succeed on a claim subject to plain-error review “if the error seriously affects the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings” (cleaned up)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).