Brian L. Saulsberry v. United States

I. Where the plea colloquy clearly indicated the defendant-petitioner’s disagreement with the factual admissions stated in a written plea agreement, included multiple recesses upon the defendant’s repeatedly expressed desire to plead “not guilty,” and resulted in the district court judge expressing that the colloquy was problematic, should the defendant be permitted to withdraw his guilty plea several days after finally stating “yes” to the district court’s inquiry whether he admitted to the facts stated in the written plea agreement? II. Whether the Sixth Circuit misinterpreted Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11, thus flouting the constitutional rights recognized in Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (1969), and McCarthy v. United States, 394 U.S. 459 (1969), by dismissing Petitioner’s appeal from the district court’s order refusing to permit him to withdraw a guilty plea where the district court itself characterized the plea colloquy as "suboptimal for all involved," stated it was "the longest change of plea this Court has ever conducted," tried to stop proceedings "on numerous occasions," expressed being "not comfortable with this," and the defendant declared "I want to plead not guilty" twice before ultimately succumbing to mere agreement with the written plea agreement he had recently signed because defense counsel told him to "stop fucking around" and warned that his "elderly mother may not live to see him free again" if he did not tell the court that the written statement was factually accurate.