discussed Cited "see" United States v. Miell See United States v. Young, 927 F.2d 1060 , *981 1062 (8th Cir.) (holding that where defendant actually knew the statutory maximum and minimum sentences to which he was ■ subject, the district court’s violation of Rule 11 was harmless error), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 943 , 112 S.Ct. 384 , 116 L.Ed.2d 334 (1991); see also United States v. Johnson, 1 F.3d 296, 303 (5th Cir.1993) (finding harmless error where defendant knew of mandatory minimum despite the court’s failure to mention it during Rule 11 colloquy).

cited Cited "see" United States v. George D. Leisure See United States v. Young, 927 F.2d 1060, 1061 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 943 , 112 S.Ct. 384 , 116 L.Ed.2d 334 (1991).

cited Cited "see, e.g." Arthur N. Bernklau, Claimant-Appellant v. Edward J. Derwinski, Secretary of Veterans Affairs See, e.g., Nagac v. Derwinski, 933 F.2d 990, 990 (Fed.Cir.), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 384 (1991); Belarmino v. Derwinski, 931 F.2d 1543, 1544 (Fed.Cir.1991).