Richard Wayne Cunningham v. United States

Cunningham pled guilty in December, 1964, to a violation of the Dyer Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2312 . He was sentenced under the Federal Youth Corrections Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 5010 (b), 5017(c). Several years later he filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to set aside the conviction, claiming that the trial judge had failed to comply with Rule 11, F.R.Crim.P., in accepting the plea of guilty. The court denied his motion. We affirm.

1. Whether the appeal is moot.

The government suggests that the appeal has been mooted by reason of Cunningham’s unconditional discharge because, under 18 U.S.C. § 5017 (c), the conviction has been set aside. A supplement to the record shows that Cunningham was unconditionally discharged after having served the maximum sentence that can be imposed under Section 5017(c). Consequently, his conviction has not been set aside under the provisions of Section 5021(a), and the appeal is not moot.

2. Whether the trial court complied with Rule 11.

Appellant contends that the trial court failed to comply with Rule 11, F. R.Crim.P. because it did not tell him, or ascertain that he already knew, the range of allowable punishments to which the plea subjected him. On December…