KERMIT ARTHUR BELGARDE, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, DEFENDANT AND APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the trial court did not err in finding compliance with Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure as it existed in 1965 when accepting the petitioner's guilty plea.
Petitioner pled guilty to second-degree murder and was sentenced to life imprisonment. He sought relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, alleging non-complianc…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Collateral Relief cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner, charged with first degree murder for the killing of his father and brother, pled guilty to second degree murder and was sentenced to life imprisonment. He sought relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and complained that the trial court did not comply with Rule 11 Fed.Rules of Crim.Procedure. He relied upon McCarthy v. United States, 394 U.S. 459, 89 S.Ct. 1166, 22 L.Ed.2d 418 (1969), and Heiden v. United States (9 Cir. 1965) 353 F. 2d 53. His plea of guilty had been entered on May 27, 1965. The district court held an evidentiary hearing and denied relief.
Halliday v. United States, 394 U.S. 831, 89 S.Ct. 1498, 23 L.Ed.2d 16 (1969) held that McCarthy, supra, was not retroactive and applied only to pleas entered after April 2, 1969, the date of McCarthy. Castro v. United States (9 Cir. 1968) 396 F. 2d 345, held that Heiden, supra, was not retroactive and did not apply to pleas entered before November 2, 1965, the date of Heiden.
The trial court found that there was compliance with Rule 11 as it read in 1965; that the court before accepting the plea ascertained the plea was voluntary and that the appellant, at the time of entering the plea, knew the applicable penalties for the offenses of first and second degree murder. The court was not required to advise him of penalties for all lesser included offenses.
The judgment is affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- McCARTHY v. United States, 394 U.S. 459 (U.S. 1969)
- Halliday v. United States, 394 U.S. 831 (U.S. 1969)
- Heiden v. United States, 353 F.2d 53 (9th Cir. 1965)
- Castro v. United States, 396 F.2d 345 (9th Cir. 1968)