ALFRED TAYLOR, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,
v.
DR. GEORGE J. BETO, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, RESPONDENT-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 an evidentiary hearing is required to determine if the appellant knowingly waived his right to counsel in a prior federal conviction used for sentence enhancement.
Appellant, a state prisoner serving a life sentence, sought habeas corpus relief, challenging a prior federal conviction used for sentence enhancement…
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 Sentence Enhancement cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
This appeal is taken from an order of the district court denying the petition of a Texas state convict for a writ of habeas corpus.
Appellant is presently serving a life sentence, having been convicted of possession of narcotics with two prior convictions used for enhancement of punishment. Conviction was affirmed in Taylor v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 1962, 358 S.W. 2d 124, cert. den. 371 U.S. 848, 83 S.Ct. 88, 9 L.Ed.2d 85.
In his petition for writ of habeas corpus, appellant contends that one of the prior convictions used for enhancement was invalid, rendering his life sentence as an habitual criminal unconstitutional. Specifically, appellant attacks his 1953 federal conviction for forgery as improper on the grounds that he was not represented by counsel and did not knowingly waive his right to counsel.
The court below denied relief without holding an evidentiary hearing, finding from the judgment of guilt form that prior to the 1953 conviction the trial judge had advised appellant of his right to counsel and that appellant voluntarily waived this right and pleaded guilty.
Although the judgment of conviction recites that appellant waived the assistance of counsel in open court, appellant has filed a verified petition to the contrary. The record in this case being inconclusive, the issues of fact which have been raised cannot be decided without an evidentiary hearing. United States v. Morgan, 1954, 346 U.S. 502, 74 S.Ct. 247, 98 L.Ed. 248; Lujan v. United States, 5 Cir., 1970, 424 F. 2d 1053.
Since a federal conviction is under attack, the district court is directed to join the United States as a defendant in the action. The judgment below is reversed and the district court is directed to hold an evidentiary hearing to determine whether appellant waived representation by counsel.
Reversed with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cline v. United States, 453 F.2d 873 (5th Cir. 1972)
-
Alva Johnson Rodgers v. United States, 451 F.2d 562 (5th Cir. 1971)
Authorities Cited
- Isbell Enters., Inc. v. Citizens Cas. Co. OF NEW York, 431 F.2d 409 (5th Cir. 1970)
- United States v. Morgan, 346 U.S. 502 (U.S. 1954)
- Lujan v. United States, 424 F.2d 1053 (5th Cir. 1970)
- Fallon v. Fay, 371 U.S. 848 (U.S. 1962)
- Cheeseboro v. Pepersack, 371 U.S. 848 (U.S. 1962)