United States v. McCullough, No. 15-15430 (11th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseDefendant pleaded guilty to several drug and firearm charges, and the district court reassigned the case to a new judge for sentencing. Defendant argued that the reassignment was unlawful because the judge initially assigned to the case was neither absent nor disabled. The court rejected this argument and concluded that the text of Rule 25 made clear that the rule does not apply where a defendant pleaded guilty. The court also rejected defendant's arguments that the traffic stop was unlawful, that the district court should have reassigned the case back to the initial judge, and that the district court committed procedural and substantive error when it sentenced defendant. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
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.