Legal Opinion

United States v. Mitchell

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided February 3, 2011No. 09-4141PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

TYMKOVICH, Circuit Judge.

At Dino Mitchell’s conspiracy trial, the government introduced evidence of his withdrawn guilty plea in its case-in-chief, including statements from his plea agreement and plea colloquy. Ordinarily a defendant’s withdrawn guilty plea or his statements during plea discussions are inadmissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 410. But in this case Mitchell executed a plea agreement that waived his right to Rule 410’s protections. When he later withdrew from the plea agreement and went to trial, the district court allowed the statements to be admitted. He now argues on…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  3. Arizona v. FulminanteSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  4. Koon v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  5. Tumey v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1927

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. United States v. RollingsCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2014
  2. United States v. Thomas Nelson, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2013
  3. United States v. JimCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2015
  4. United States v. McIntoshCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2022
  5. United States v. JimDistrict Court, D. New Mexico · 2012

14 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