PERCY LEE REID, JR., PETITIONER-APPELLANT,
v.
JIMMY ROSE, WARDEN, DEFENDANT-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.
A defendant who has pleaded guilty cannot raise independent claims of prior constitutional rights violations.
Appellant, a juvenile at the time, pleaded guilty to assault with intent to murder and robbery with a deadly weapon. He sought habeas corpus relief, a…
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 Waiver Of Constitutional Rights cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant in this case was charged with and pled guilty to assault with intent to murder and robbery with a deadly weapon when he was 16 years old. He was sentenced to two concurrent sentences of 20 years and 10 years, respectively. He now appeals from denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1970). He contends that his constitutional rights to due process were violated by the facts that at a juvenile court waiver hearing, no testimony was taken prior to the entry of the waiver, and that he was denied counsel at a critical stage in the criminal proceeding because he had no lawyer and was offered none at the juvenile court waiver proceeding.
We would consider that these issues posed substantial problems for critical consideration and probable reversal, absent a 1973 decision of the United States Supreme Court reversing this court in the case of Tollett v. Henderson, 411 U. S. 258, 93 S.Ct. 1602, 36 L.Ed.2d 235 (1973). In Tollett a majority of the court held:
“When a criminal defendant has solemnly admitted in open court that he is in fact guilty of the offense with which he is charged, he may not thereafter raise independent claims relating to the deprivation of constitutional rights that occurred prior to the entry of the guilty plea.” Tollett v. Henderson, supra, at 267, 93 S.Ct. at 1608.
We affirm the District Court’s denial of the writ because, and only because, we believe our decision is controlled by Tollett v. Henderson, supra.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Stout v. United States, 508 F.2d 951 (6th Cir. 1975)
Authorities Cited
- Tollett v. Henderson, 411 U.S. 258 (U.S. 1973)