Matches in DBpedia 2014 for { <http://dbpedia.org/resource/United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez> ?p ?o. }
Showing items 1 to 43 of
43
with 100 items per page.
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez abstract "United States v. Dominguez Benitez, 542 U.S. 74 (2004), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that, in a criminal proceeding in federal court, a defendant who does not alert the district court to a possible violation of Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure must show on appeal that the violation affirmatively affected his rights in order to obtain reversal of his conviction by guilty plea. Rule 11, which pertains to criminal prosecutions in United States federal courts only, governs the offering of plea bargains to criminal defendants and the procedures district courts must employ to ensure that the defendant knows of and properly waives his trial-related constitutional rights.In Benitez, the trial court violated Rule 11 when it took the defendant's plea by failing to warn him that the plea could not be withdrawn if the court did not accept the prosecution's sentencing recommendations. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed the conviction, considering that the non-English speaking defendant did not understand his rights under those circumstances.The Supreme Court unanimously reversed, ruling the Court of Appeals had applied the wrong test by not requiring the defendant to show how the error actually prejudiced the proceedings. The Court of Appeals had consequently failed to consider the entire record regarding what the defendant understood. An eight-justice majority of the Supreme Court, in an opinion by Justice David Souter, held that a defendant attempting to reverse his conviction due to a Rule 11 violation must show a reasonable probability that, but for the trial court's error, he would not have entered the plea. Justice Antonin Scalia concurred in the judgment but disagreed with the majority's standard.".
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez wikiPageExternalLink 03-167.pdf.
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez wikiPageExternalLink argument.
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez wikiPageExternalLink 1743.
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez wikiPageExternalLink 2003-0167.mer.ja.html.
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez wikiPageID "646513".
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez wikiPageRevisionID "520507568".
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez arguedate "--04-21".
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez argueyear "2004".
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez citation "172800.0".
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez concurrence "Scalia".
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez decidedate "--06-14".
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez decideyear "2004".
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez fullname "United States, Petitioner v. Carlos Dominguez Benitez".
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez hasPhotoCollection United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez.
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez holding "An untimely objection to the omission of a Rule 11 warning warrants reversal only if there is a reasonable probability that but for the trial court's error, the defendant would not have plead guilty. The reversal of a conviction for a Rule 11 violation without requiring the defendant to show prejudice was accordingly improper. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and remanded.".
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez joinmajority "Rehnquist, Stevens, O'Connor, Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer".
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez lawsapplied "Fed. R. Crim. P. 11; 52".
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez litigants "United States v. Dominguez Benitez".
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez majority "Souter".
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez oralargument argument.
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez prior "25920.0".
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez scotus "1994".
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez subsequent "25920.0".
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez uspage "74".
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez usvol "542".
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez subject Category:2004_in_United_States_case_law.
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez subject Category:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases.
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez subject Category:United_States_plea_bargaining_case_law.
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez type Case.
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez type LegalCase.
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez type SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase.
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez type UnitOfWork.
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez type Event.
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez type Situation.
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez comment "United States v. Dominguez Benitez, 542 U.S. 74 (2004), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that, in a criminal proceeding in federal court, a defendant who does not alert the district court to a possible violation of Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure must show on appeal that the violation affirmatively affected his rights in order to obtain reversal of his conviction by guilty plea.".
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez label "United States v. Dominguez Benitez".
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez sameAs m.02_6y5.
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez sameAs Q7893268.
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez sameAs Q7893268.
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez wasDerivedFrom United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez?oldid=520507568.
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez isPrimaryTopicOf United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez.
- United_States_v._Dominguez_Benitez name "United States, Petitioner v. Carlos Dominguez Benitez".