If you should ever hear that I am hospitalized in a deep coma, please come to the hospital and say the magic phrase, “Counsel, do you know of any reason why this plea should not be accepted?”

In some jurisdictions, judges and defense attorneys will deliberately take a plea without it being “knowing and voluntary.” While this sounds bad, there is a little more going on in the background.

As you know, the collateral consequences for some crimes (in terms of later federal convictions or administrative consequences) are much, much, greater.

State court judges are aware of this, and in some jurisdictions figure it is better to have the defendant do whatever time (or rehabilitation) the state mandates, and then to later have the conviction attacked on motion.

Essentially, some states have developed fairly enlightened sentencing schemes. The only way to make them work is to treat lower-level drug crimes as just that – lower-level crimes. However, if the federal sentencing scheme makes them into much greater crimes (requiring, say, a 10-year conviction upon a first federal conviction following a state conviction), the state system loses its impact. So, giving a defendant the option to argue (if he is ever facing a federal sentencing) that his first conviction was invalid (because of an invalid plea), then the state judge has helped everyone (except for the federal prosecutor).