RUBEN ALFRED URIBE, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
LOUIS S. NELSON, WARDEN, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE

9th Cir. | 1972-11-24
No. 72-2412
469 F.2d 1086 United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (1972)

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.


Holding

The court held that the prisoner's claims do not warrant habeas corpus relief because his Miranda rights were not violated in a way that prejudiced him, no plea bargain was breached, and his claim regarding the crime charged is unexhausted.


Facts & Procedural History

A state prisoner sought habeas corpus relief, claiming inadequate Miranda warnings, a broken plea bargain, and conviction for a crime other than charg…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM:

Uribe, a state prisoner, appeals the decision of the District Court denying a petition for writ of habeas corpus, 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1970).

Uribe claims that his conviction should be reversed under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), because he received inadequate warnings during his initial interrogation. However, he was not prejudiced in any way by these inadequate warnings since he gave no confession, made no damaging statements, and, in fact, pleaded guilty at trial. In these circumstances, there is nothing to which the Miranda rule can apply.

Uribe also claims that his attorney and the prosecution made a plea bargain which was not kept. The District Court held an evidentiary hearing on this issue. See Macon v. Craven, 457 F. 2d 342 (9th Cir. 1972). The record supports the decision of the lower court that no bargain had been struck.

Finally, Uribe alleges that he pleaded guilty to and was convicted of a crime other than the one with which he was charged. Upon this claim he has failed to exhaust his available state remedies.

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw