United States v. Avila, No. 12-3047 (10th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Defendant-Appellant Ramiro Avila was charged with possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute. After the district court denied Defendant's motion to suppress, he entered an unconditional guilty plea to the charge. Defendant contended that his plea was not knowing and voluntary because it was induced by the district court’s statement that he would "still have a right to an appeal" if the court accepted his plea. Upon review, the Tenth Circuit held that when a court chooses to instruct a defendant that he has a right to appeal following the entry of an unconditional guilty plea, the court materially misinforms the defendant regarding the consequences of his plea when it fails further to advise him that the plea may limit that right. Under such circumstances, if the court tells defendant without qualification that he has a right to appeal, a defendant’s plea is not knowing and voluntary.
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.