Legal Opinion

Sherwood E. Roberts v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided January 28, 1974No. 73-1810PublishedCited by 50 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

2Per curiam

In Berry v. United States, 412 F.2d 189, 192 (3d Cir. 1969), we held that because the “mandate of . [F.R.Crim.P.] 11, before and after the 1966 amendment, is designed to insure that the pleader is made aware of the outer limits of punishment,” knowledge of ineligibility for parole was necessary to an understanding of a plea of guilty. In United States v. Jasper, 481 F.2d 976 (3d Cir. 1973), and Kelsey v. United States, 484 F.2d 1198 (3d Cir. 1973), we extended the Berry rule to vitiate a plea of guilty under circumstances where the pleader was erroneously told he could be…

3Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Raymond S. Berry v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1969
  2. Juan Kelsey v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1973
  3. United States v. Alfred J. JasperCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1973

4Cited by50 opinions

  1. United States v. Herbert BaylinCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1982
  2. United States v. Walter L. Jones, United States of America v. Calvin BainesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1976
  3. Frank E. Bachner v. United States of America, (Two Cases). United States of America v. Frank E. BachnerCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1975
  4. Thomas G. Parry Bh-2648 v. Frederick RosemeyerCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1995
  5. Kevin Fowler v. United States Parole CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1996

45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API