No. 19-5949

Marcelino Martinez v. United States

Lower Court: Fifth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-09-16
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: criminal-procedure criminal-procedure-rule-11 district-court federal-rules-of-criminal-procedure guilty-plea plain-error plea-bargaining plea-negotiations rule-11 substantial-rights
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Immigration
Latest Conference: 2020-01-10
Question Presented (AI Summary)

when-district-court-violates-rule-11(c)(1)-of-federal-rules-of-criminal-procedure

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1) When a district court violates Rule 11(c)(1) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure by interfering in plea negotiations, can a defendant ordinarily satisfy the substantial rights prong of plain error where the defendant pleaded guilty on the very same day as the Rule 11(c)(1) violation? 2) Is a defendant required to demonstrate that a district court’s Rule 11(c)(1) violation “likely” caused him to plead guilty in order to satisfy the substantial rights prong of plain error? ii PARTIES Petitioner: Marcelino Martinez Respondent: United States of America

Docket Entries

2020-01-13
Petition DENIED.
2019-12-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/10/2020.
2019-11-15
Brief of respondent United States of America in opposition filed.
2019-10-09
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 15, 2019.
2019-10-08
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 16, 2019 to November 15, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-09-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 16, 2019)

Attorneys

Marcelino Martinez
William Reynolds BiggsWILLIAM R. BIGGS, PLLC, Petitioner
William Reynolds BiggsWILLIAM R. BIGGS, PLLC, Petitioner
United States of America
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent