Summary

Portrait of John Marshall Harlan II John Marshall Harlan II Halliday v. United States (394 U.S. 831…

I agree with the court below that the absence of an explicit inquiry may sometimes entitle the defendant to a subsequent hearing, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, to determine whether the plea was in fact made voluntarily and understandingly. In view of the wholly inexplicit directives of the old rule, however, I believe that such a hearing suffices, and that a plea made under that rule should not automatically be set aside as in the case of a plea made under the 1966 rule-the situation in McCarthy.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of John Marshall Harlan II John Marshall Harlan II Halliday v. United States (394 U.S. 831…

While the amended Rule 11 requires the trial judge to follow specific procedures before accepting a plea of guilty, and was promulgated for that very purpose, see Notes of Advisory Committee on Rules, the pre-1966 Rule 11 was 'substantially a restatement of existing law and practice,' ibid., and required only that the judge 'determine' that the plea is made 'voluntarily with understanding of the nature of the charge,' without, however, specifying a procedure for making this determination.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature