Crimes of Moral Turpitude

(A)

The court may fail to secure voluntary, knowing and intelligent waivers of the fundamental constitutional rights waived by a plea of guilty or no contest.[111] The plea must be vacated where the district court failed to take full Rule 11 waivers from a criminal defendant, even though the defendant has prior experience with entry of guilty pleas, fails to raise an objection, and is advised of his right to a jury trial.[112]  The court must conduct an on-the-record colloquy with the defendant, in addition to obtaining a written waiver, to obtain a valid waiver of the right to jury trial.[113]  The waiver of the right to a jury trial is not knowing and voluntary where the nature of the right was not sufficiently explained to the defendant.[114]

[111] Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969).

[112] United States v. Hernandez-Fraire, 208 F.3d 945 (11th Cir. 2000) (court failed to inform defendant of right to plead not guilty, right to assistance of counsel at trial, right to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses at trial, and right against compelled self-incrimination).

[113] Cabberiza v. Moore, 217 F.3d 1329 (11th Cir. 2000) (Seventh Circuit agrees; Fifth, Sixth, Ninth, and Tenth Circuits disagree).

[114] See Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458 (1938); United States v. Duarte-Higareda, 113 F.3d 1000 (9th Cir. 1997); United States v. Martin, 704 F.2d 267, 273 n.5 (6th Cir. 1983) (“a defendant can hardly be said to make a strategic decision to waive his jury trial right if he is not aware of the nature of the right or the consequences of its waiver”); United States v. Delgado, 635 F.2d 889, 890 (7th Cir. 1981) (reversing conviction after bench trial where record did not reveal whether defendant understood his right to a jury trial and the consequences of waiver); see also United States v. Lyons, 898 F.2d 210, 215 (1st Cir. 1990) (knowing waiver requires defendant be fully informed about the right s/he is waiving).