JAMES BOYD MACKEY, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
E. J. OBERHAUSER, DEFENDANTAPPELLEE
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 affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding no error in the district court's decision.
Appellant sought habeas corpus relief, alleging various constitutional violations related to his guilty plea and prior proceedings. The district court…
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 Adequate Representation By Counsel cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
Appellant seeks review of an order of the district court denying his petition for habeas corpus without an eviden-tiary hearing. The order of the district court is affirmed for the following reasons:
1. The district court correctly determined that a defendant who enters a plea of guilty waives the right to trial by jury as well as the right to confront his accusers. McCarthy v. United States, 394 U.S. 459, 466, 89 S.Ct. 1166, 22 L.Ed.2d 418 (1969).
2. We agree with the district court that no evidentiary hearing was required on appellant’s claim of cruel and unusual punishment since the claim was not supported by factual allegations. Schlette v. California, 284 F. 2d 827, 833-834 (9th Cir. 1960).
3. We also agree with the district court that the record conclusively establishes that appellant was afforded adequate representation by counsel, hence no evidentiary hearing on the claim was required. White v. Wilson, 399 F. 2d 596, 599 (9th Cir. 1968); Hernandez v. Schneckloth, 425 F. 2d 89, 90 (9th Cir. 1970).
4. Appellant’s allegation that he pleaded guilty because of a prior coerced confession, without more, did not entitle him to a hearing. McMann v. Richardson, 397 U.S. 759, 771, 90 S.Ct. 1441, 25 L.Ed.2d 763 (1970).
5. Finally, appellant’s contention that the guilty plea itself was involuntary was not presented to the district court, and we therefore do not consider it. Evans v. Cupp, 415 F. 2d 844 (9th Cir. 1969).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Pierce v. Cardwell, 572 F.2d 1339 (9th Cir. 1978)
-
United States ex rel. William A. WAX v. Twomey, 465 F.2d 352 (7th Cir. 1972)
-
Hunt v. Nelson, 440 F.2d 58 (9th Cir. 1971)
Authorities Cited
- McCARTHY v. United States, 394 U.S. 459 (U.S. 1969)
- McMANN v. Richardson, 397 U.S. 759 (U.S. 1970)
- Schlette v. People OF the State OF Cal., 284 F.2d 827 (9th Cir. 1960)
- White v. Wilson, 399 F.2d 596 (9th Cir. 1968)
- Evans v. Cupp, 415 F.2d 844 (9th Cir. 1969)
- Hernandez v. Schneckloth, 425 F.2d 89 (9th Cir. 1970)