Whether the district court followed the procedure mandated by FED. R. CRIM. P. 11 in accepting a guilty plea

QUESTION PRESENTED Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 provides, “before the court accepts a plea of guilty,” the court must advise and question the defendant, personally and in open court, to ensure that the defendant pleads with a full understanding of the charge, potential penalties, and his constitutional rights. Here, the magistrate judge abruptly recessed a plea colloquy after giving a partial Rule 11 advisement because he had unspecified concerns. Three weeks later, the magistrate judge said he had satisfied himself off the record that Smith was competent to proceed, completed the remaining half of a Rule 11 colloquy, and took Smith’s guilty plea. In affirming the judgment of conviction entered pursuant to Smith’s guilty plea, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals did not consider whether the district court followed the procedure mandated by Rule 11, instead, it asked only whether Smith’s plea was “knowing, voluntary, and intelligent.” Accordingly, one question is presented: 1. FED. R. CRIM. P. 11 requires district courts to engage in a specific, on-the-record plea colloquy. In reviewing a plea colloquy, is it sufficient for an appellate court to consider only whether the defendant entered an informed and voluntary plea? i