Daniel A. Rodriguez v. United States
Does a Silonk Plea Foraclose a ddfondant From flint a Mlohion For Newly Discovered Evitelone@.
QUESTION(S) PRESENTED . Does a Silonk Plea Foraclose a ddfondant From flint a Mlohion For Newly Discovered _ Evitelone@., Pursuant to Rerle 33, : Where i . . a\ the statute is ambiJous, As it doas not directly Prohibit a defendant that his trial was in form ef a Pica’ bY WS Plaa was sans waivers: . ec) the Nowly discovered evidence . admitedty was discovered PaStSentencin I$ Plea : hex Co dd) the Newly discovered eidanca. holds p02, Wat Conshi tutional ramitlications undar Due Pnc.0ss: oc) He MowlY discovered evidence would have altered We outcome of the case’ €\ Bnd where, No. ober Remedy onist., 4) Also whora neithor the Government or the District Court Obdect $a Rule 43 aS wrond vehicla. STATUTORY PROVISION’ LNVOLVED , — Neehian 465 of Title 28 of US Code