EDWARDS

v.

LAMBDIN

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Bennett, 990 F.2d 998 (7th Cir. 1993)
  …2d 706, 711 (7th Cir.1993). In reviewing Rule 11 proceedings for compliance, we do not give “ ‘Rule 11 such a crabbed interpretation that ceremony [is] exalted over substance.’ ” United States v. Ray, 828 F. 2d 399, 404 (7th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1045, 108 S.Ct. 781, 98 L.Ed.2d 867 and cert. denied, 485 U.S. 964, 108 S.Ct. 1233, 99 L.Ed.2d 432 (1988) (quoting Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(h), Advisory Committee Note to the 1983 Amendment); accord Price, 988 F. 2d 706, 711. “[T]he test for reversal on appeal i…
• United States v. Wagner, 996 F.2d 906 (7th Cir. 1993)
  …rights, ‘the test on appeal is whether looking at the total circumstances surrounding the plea, the defendant was informed of his or her rights.’ ” United States v. Ray, 828 F. 2d 399, 414 (7th Cir.1987), cert. denied, McChristion v. United States, 484 U.S. 1045, 108 S.Ct. 781, 98 L.Ed.2d 867 (1988), (quoting United States v. Frazier, 70S F. 2d 903, 907 (7th Cir.1983)). The district court is required by Rule 11(c)(1) to explain the nature of the charge, the mandatory minimum and maximum penalty, including…