No. 18-5945

David Chiddo v. United States

Lower Court: Eleventh Circuit
Docketed: 2018-09-12
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: appeal-from-magistrate circuit-split district-court-order federal-magistrates-act felony-guilty-plea felony-plea judicial-procedure magistrate-authority plea-agreement plea-agreement-stipulation statutory-authority statutory-interpretation stipulated-facts
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity DueProcess Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2019-01-04
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does a federal magistrate have authority to accept a felony guilty plea?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW The circuits are divided on whether the Federal Magistrates Act’s “additional duties” clause, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(3), authorizes magistrates to accept a felony guilty plea. The Eleventh Circuit concluded that a magistrate’s acceptance of petitioner’s guilty plea was statutorily authorized, that the district court was not required to enter an order authorizing a plea, and that no order or report by the magistrate upon acceptance of the plea was required; that rules governing appeal from a magistrate’s ruling were inapplicable; and that by stipulating that proffered facts supported the plea, petitioner was barred from appealing, even on a plain error basis, the absence of any factual basis for the plea accepted by the magistrate. The questions presented are: 1. Does a federal magistrate have authority to accept a felony guilty plea? 2. Where a plea agreement provides that stipulated facts present an adequate basis to sustain a guilty plea, is the right to appeal the district court’s failure to elicit a sufficient factual basis waived, precluding even plain error review? i INTERESTED PARTIES The only parties interested in the proceeding other than those named in the caption of the appellate decision. ii

Docket Entries

2019-01-07
Petition DENIED.
2018-11-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/4/2019.
2018-11-26
Reply of petitioner David Chiddo filed. (Distributed)
2018-11-13
Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
2018-10-04
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 13, 2018.
2018-10-03
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 12, 2018 to November 13, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.
2018-09-06
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 12, 2018)

Attorneys

David Chiddo
Jacqueline Esther ShapiroJacqueline E. Shapiro, P.A., Petitioner
Jacqueline Esther ShapiroJacqueline E. Shapiro, P.A., Petitioner
United States
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent