CLYDE HENDRY, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,
v.
C. MURRAY HENDERSON, WARDEN, 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 a prisoner's allegations of an involuntary guilty plea due to ignorance of charges and consequences, if true, are grounds for habeas corpus relief.
A Louisiana state prisoner pleaded guilty to attempted murder and was sentenced. He filed a habeas petition alleging his plea was involuntary because …
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 Retroactivity Of Boykin V. Alabama cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
We review on appeal an order of the district court denying the petition of a Louisiana state prisoner for the writ of habeas corpus. We vacate and remand.
Appellant, represented by court-appointed counsel, was convicted in a trial court of the State of Louisiana on his plea of guilty of attempted murder and was sentenced on June 13, 1966, to 15 years imprisonment. Appellant filed his habeas petition in the court below alleging that his guilty plea was involuntary because given in ignorance of the nature of the charges against him and of the consequences of his plea, that he was not aware of the rights he was waiving by pleading guilty, and that neither the court nor his counsel advised him on these points. The district court denied relief without requiring a response on the grounds that Boykin v. Alabama, 1969, 395 U.S. 238, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274, is not retroactive. This Court has held prior to Boykin and prior to appellant’s conviction that a conviction based upon a guilty plea given through ignorance is invalid. Wade v. Wainwright, 5 Cir. 1969, 420 F. 2d 898; Trujillo v. United States, 5 Cir. 1967, 377 F. 2d 266; Busby v. Holman, 5 Cir. 1966, 356 F. 2d 75.
Appellant’s allegations, if true, set out sufficient grounds for relief. The judgment below is vacated and this cause is remanded to the district court with directions to afford an opportunity to appellant for attempted proof of those allegations, by a review of available state records and by an appropriate hearing and the entry of findings of ■ fact and conclusions of law based thereon. Title 28, U.S.C., Section 2254; Brooks v. Smith, 5 Cir. 1970, 429 F. 2d 1281; Hollingshead v. Wainwright, 5 Cir. 1970, 423 F. 2d 1059.
The claim of ineffectiveness of counsel presented to the trial court was apparently not raised in the prior state proceedings. It will be appropriate' for the trial court to dismiss this claim without prejudice so as to permit it to be first advanced before and considered by the courts of Louisiana.
Vacated and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bryant v. Elliott, 472 F.2d 572 (5th Cir. 1973)
-
Hunter v. Louie L. Wainwright, 499 F.2d 340 (5th Cir. 1974)
Authorities Cited
- Isbell Enters., Inc. v. Citizens Cas. Co. OF NEW York, 431 F.2d 409 (5th Cir. 1970)
- Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (U.S. 1969)
- Busby v. Holman, 356 F.2d 75 (5th Cir. 1966)
- Epifanio Trujillo v. United States, 377 F.2d 266 (5th Cir. 1967)
- Carroll E. Wade v. Louie L. Wainwright, 420 F.2d 898 (5th Cir. 1969)
- Cleveland Hollingshead v. Louie L. Wainwright, 423 F.2d 1059 (5th Cir. 1970)
- Brooks v. Smith, 429 F.2d 1281 (5th Cir. 1970)