Criminal Procedure — guilty pleas

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Criminal

Criminal Procedure — guilty pleas

The district court did not err in refusing to accept a guilty plea, where the defendant would not waive his right to a jury and his right against self-incrimination.

“On appeal, Bahena-Navarro mistakenly seeks to focus our attention on the factual basis for his guilty plea. Although it is certainly possible that Bahena-Navarro satisfied each element of a § 1326(a) charge, thus giving his guilty plea a proper factual basis, we need not decide that issue. Rather, the factual basis for his guilty plea is ultimately irrelevant because Bahena-Navarro never knowingly waived his trial rights, despite the district court’s numerous attempts to explain those rights. For example, Bahena-Navarro expressed confusion about the type of plea he was entering, stating, ‘I thought you said that it was going to be a blind plea.’ (Tr. at 231.) Bahena-Navarro also expressed confusion about whether he was required to waive his right against self-incrimination. His claimed confusion led to a short recess, after which he became confused about whether his guilty plea would permit him to testify before a jury, stating, ‘I would like to testify before a jury . . . .’ (Id. at 236.) A district court cannot accept a defendant’s conditional guilty plea if that defendant does not understand that he is waiving his right to a jury and his right against self-incrimination. Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(b)(1)(C), (E).”

Affirmed.

11-1348 U.S. v. Bahena-Navarro

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Holderman, J., Kanne, J.