United States v. Ladue, No. 16-2299 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseThe Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea to two counts of aggravated sexual abuse. The court held that the district court did not violate Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(b)(1)(I), because no mandatory minimum penalty applied in this case. Even if Rule 11 required the district court to advise defendant that he was not eligible for probation, a departure from Rule 11 requirements was harmless error because it did not affect his substantial rights. In this case, an attorney advised defendant before he entered his guilty plea that probation was not an option, and defendant sought to withdraw his plea long before he learned he was not eligible for probation so he could not show that the district court's failure to advise that probation was unavailable caused his decision to plead guilty.
Court Description: Loken, Author, with Wollman, Circuit Judge, and Rossiter, District Judge] Criminal case - Criminal law. Ineligibility for probation is not a mandatory minimum penalty within the meaning of Rule 11(b)(1)(I) and the court's failure to inform plaintiff that he was ineligible for probation because he was pleading guilty to aggravated sexual abuse, a Class A felony, was not a violation of the rule; even assuming that Rule 11 required the court to advise defendant that he was not eligible for probation, the failure to do so was a harmless error because it did not affect substantial rights; defendant could not show that eligibility for probation was a decisive factor in his decision to plead guilty.
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.