Nagelberg v. United States

377 U.S. 266, 84 S. Ct. 1252, 12 L. Ed. 2d 290, 1964 U.S. LEXIS 1212
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedMay 25, 1964
Docket785
StatusPublished
Cited by29 cases

This text of 377 U.S. 266 (Nagelberg v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Nagelberg v. United States, 377 U.S. 266, 84 S. Ct. 1252, 12 L. Ed. 2d 290, 1964 U.S. LEXIS 1212 (1964).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

On April 11, 1962, petitioner pleaded not guilty to federal narcotics charges; thereafter, on July 18, 1962, he was permitted to withdraw this plea and plead guilty; in November 1962, when the case came on for sentencing, he moved to withdraw his guilty plea because of facts and circumstances which had changed since the time of the plea, including petitioner’s extensive cooperation with the Government. The Government acquiesced in this motion, but the district judge denied it, holding that he had no power to permit withdrawal of the plea on such grounds. The court sentenced petitioner to the minimum statutory term of imprisonment and the Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction, 323 F. 2d 936.

The Government now says that it consented to petitioner’s motion to withdraw his plea because it “planned to dismiss the pending indictment against petitioner and substitute lesser charges.” The Government admits that this purpose was not expressly stated and that “it may be that the court was misled.”

*399 In these circumstances, we believe that the court has discretion to permit withdrawal of the plea. See Kercheval v. United States, 274 U. S. 220, 224 (1927). Accordingly, we grant the petition for certiorari, vacate the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand the case to the District Court for further proceedings in conformity with this opinion.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Pettiford v. United States
700 A.2d 207 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1997)
Gooding v. United States
513 A.2d 1320 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1986)
Schmidt v. State
668 P.2d 656 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1983)
King v. State
615 S.W.2d 69 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1980)
United States v. Ulano
468 F. Supp. 1054 (C.D. California, 1979)
United States v. Manuel R. Sambro
454 F.2d 918 (D.C. Circuit, 1971)
United States v. Wolfson
52 F.R.D. 170 (D. Delaware, 1971)
United States v. American Radiator & Standard Sanitary Corp.
288 F. Supp. 696 (W.D. Pennsylvania, 1968)
Warden, Nevada State Prison v. Peters
429 P.2d 549 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1967)
Arthur Bruce v. United States
379 F.2d 113 (D.C. Circuit, 1967)
Smith v. United States
250 F. Supp. 803 (D. New Jersey, 1966)
People v. Zaleski
133 N.W.2d 175 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1965)
United States v. Washington
341 F.2d 277 (Third Circuit, 1965)
United States v. Lanna Washington
341 F.2d 277 (Third Circuit, 1965)
Charles Daniel Everett v. United States
336 F.2d 979 (D.C. Circuit, 1964)
United States v. Colson
230 F. Supp. 953 (S.D. New York, 1964)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
377 U.S. 266, 84 S. Ct. 1252, 12 L. Ed. 2d 290, 1964 U.S. LEXIS 1212, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nagelberg-v-united-states-scotus-1964.