United States v. White, No. 13-1035 (8th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CaseDefendant pleaded guilty to laundering money and conspiring to distribute and possess with intent to distribute cocaine, heroin, and marijuana. The court concluded that the district court did not abuse its discretion by failing to ensure that defendant made his plea knowingly and voluntarily where defendant confessed his guilt to the crime and admitted the underlying facts as described by the government and as described in the plea agreement, and where he consulted with counsel and confirmed to the district court that he needed no additional time. The court also concluded that the district court properly found that counsel had no conflict of interest. In regards to defendant's claim that counsel was ineffective, the court did not address it because it relied upon evidence outside the record of conviction and should be raised through collateral proceedings rather than direct appeal. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment of the district court.
Court Description: Criminal case - Criminal law. Where defendant contended he should have been allowed to withdraw his guilty plea because he did not have adequate time to review it, the district court did not err in accepting defendant's guilty plea as the court permitted defendant additional time to review the provisions of the plea and defendant consulted with counsel and then confirmed to the court that he needed no additional time; district court properly rejected defendant's claim that his attorney had a conflict of interest; court would not address claim of ineffective assistance of counsel as the claim relies upon evidence outside the record and should be raised in a habeas proceeding.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.