• Mark Ryan

A Mistake in the 11th Cir. Opinion?

Three days ago, I blogged about the "Interesting New Criminal WOTUS Case." That case, United States v. Coleman, 2020 WL 7244923 (11th Cir. 2020) (unpublished), contains a mistake regarding WOTUS in the final paragraph that I originally missed. I've quoted the language below. Can you spot the mistake?

Finally, entering a judgment without an adequate factual basis “seriously affects the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings.” Olano, 507 U.S. at 736, 113 S. Ct. at 1779 (quotation marks omitted and alteration adopted). Rule 11’s requirement of a sufficient factual basis is to ensure that a factually innocent defendant does not mistakenly plead guilty. Lopez, 907 F.2d at 1100. The record does not provide the assurance that the fuel on the ground significantly affected the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Ochlocknee River. Therefore, we vacate Coleman's conviction and sentence, and remand to the district court for further proceedings.

If you would like to receive email notifications of new blogposts, go to the signup button above, leave your email, and you'll be alerted to updates.

32 views1 comment

Recent Posts

See All

A Special Treat

In my April 12 blogpost, I explained that I would be retiring soon, and with retirement I would be retiring the CWA Blog at the end of May. In that post, I referenced a special treat for my readers. A

Six New Cases

We have three Circuit Court cases this round, which is unusual. None are earth-shaking, but the Rio Hondo case is worth a read if TMDL/anti-backsliding/WQ permit limits are your thing. The Center for

Enviro Groups Sue the Corps Over Pipelines

A number of environmental groups have sued the Corps over NWP 12, alleging that the modifications to the NWP failed to properly analyze environmental impacts of pipelines. The NWP modifications pushed