Legal Issues in the Coronavirus Pandemic

First and foremost, we at Gilbert & Greif, P.A. want you to stay safe and healthy during these times. Federal, state and local authorities are issuing guidelines and bulletins daily, and there will be more to come. Business at every level is affected, and families and individuals face uncertainty regarding what lies ahead, both medically and financially.

Like everyone else, we have been impacted by these events, but the good news is that we are open and available to assist our clients with their legal questions and problems. Some may arise specifically out of the coronavirus situation, and others are part of everyday life, as unusual as things are at the moment. For the safety of all, we are restricting personal visits to the office, but we can still cover a lot of ground through phone, video and email. The law has faced previous pandemics so there is precedent to be drawn on. Although there has been some emergency legislation passed at both the federal and state levels, most of what we deal with and have dealt with for years remains in place. Because of court shutdowns, there will be delays in certain cases, but that is nothing new. We resolve to remain calm and carry on. If we can be of assistance, please don’t hesitate to contact us.


June 23, 2017: 30th anniversary of 1st Circuit decision in U.S. v. Daniels

On June 23, 1987, the US Circuit Court of Appeals for the First Circuit handed down a decision authored by now US Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer in United States v. Daniels. Charlie Gilbert represented Appellant Daniels. The appeals court held that the trial court had committed error by refusing to allow the Appellant to withdraw his guilty plea because the full terms of the plea agreement had not been fully disclosed to the court, as required by Rule 11 of the Criminal Rules. The omitted disclosure was the government’s position that all of the defendants had to plead guilty or none could, thus setting the stage for the other defendants to pressure this defendant to plead guilty. Therefore, the guilty plea may not have been voluntary as required by Rule 11, and the defendant should have been allowed to withdraw it.