Whether the district court's error in accepting the guilty plea under Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 11(b)(8) is 'plain' where the record identifies no conduct that matches the clearly established and uncontested elements of the crime of conviction

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW The type and quantum of evidence necessary to constitute an adequate factual basis under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(b)(3) is well established: there must be some evidence on the record that the conduct which the defendant admits matches the elements of the offense to which the defendant has pleaded guilty. See McCarthy v. United States, 394 U.S. 459, 467 (1969); Fed. R. Crim. P. 11, advisory committee’s notes to 1966 amendment. The question presented is: Where the record identifies no conduct that matches the clearly established and uncontested elements of the crime of conviction, is the district court’s error in accepting the guilty plea under Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 11(b)(8) “plain,” regardless of whether the precedent has established the quantum of evidence the Government was required to prove? ii No. In the Supreme Court of the United States CHRISTOPHER ERNEST MARTINEZ, PETITIONER, V. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RESPONDENT PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Petitioner Christopher Ernest Martinez asks that a writ of certiorari issue to review the opinion and judgment entered by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on January 9, 2023.