RULE 11 GOVERNS THE HEARINGS AT WHICH PLEAS OF GUILTY ARE ENTERED. THE RULE WAS SUBSTANTIALLY AMENDED IN 1975 TO EXPAND THE HEARING AND THUS PROVIDE A MORE COMPREHENSIVE RECORD OF MATTERS BEARING ON THE VALIDITY OF A PLEA. IT WAS HOPED THAT SUCH A RECORD WOULD ASSIST FEDERAL COURTS IN REVIEWING THE LARGE NUMBER OF POSTCONVICTION CHALLENGES TO GUILTY PLEAS. SUCH CHALLENGES GENERALLY ARE BASED EITHER ON THE DEFENDANT'S ALLEGED MISUNDERSTANDING AT THE TIME OF THE PLEA OR ON EVENTS OCCURRING OUTSIDE THE PLEA THAT MAY AFFECT ITS VALIDITY. IN THE FORMER SITUATION, THE RULE 11 RECORD MAY BE HELPFUL IN DISPOSING OF POSTCONVICTION CHALLENGES. IN THE LATTER CASE, THE RECORD MAY BE LESS HELPFUL. THE DEFENDANT MAY EASILY IMPEACH THE FINDINGS MADE AT THE RULE 11 HEARING AS TO THE VOLUNTARINESS OF HIS PLEA OR THE NONEXISTENCE OF SECRET PLEA BARGAINING. THE DEFENDANT'S FAILURE TO RAISE CLAIMS ABOUT THESE MATTERS DURING THE HEARING CANNOT PROPERLY BE INTERPRETED AS A WAIVER OF SUCH CLAIMS. THE RULE 11 RECORD CANNOT ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR POSTCONVICTION HEARINGS WHEN PLEA CHALLENGES CONTAIN CREDIBLE ALLEGATIONS OF GOVERNMENT COERCION OR SECRET PROMISES. SOME FEDERAL COURTS, IN THEIR CONCERN WITH FINALITY FOR CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS, HAVE ESTABLISHED EVIDENTIARY AND OTHER BARRIERS TO ATTACKS ON GUILTY PLEAS. IN ADDITION, RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR MOST POSTCONVICTION MOTIONS ATTEMPT TO PROVIDE FOR THE DISPOSITION OF SUCH MOTIONS WITHOUT A FULL HEARING, IN PART BY EXPANDING THE WRITTEN RECORD ON WHICH THE MOTIONS MAY BE CONSIDERED. SUCH TECHNIQUES EITHER WILL FAIL TO ELIMINATE PROFITLESS HEARINGS ON THE VALIDITY OF GUILTY PLEAS OR WILL MECHANICALLY DENY HEARINGS REGARDLESS OF THE MERITS OF THE CHALLENGE. POSTCONVICTION ATTACKS ON GUILTY PLEAS MUST BE HEARD DESPITE THE COSTS IN TIME AND EXPENSE THAT SUCH HEARINGS ENTAIL. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED).