George Forrens v. United States

(dissenting) :

The possibility is minimal that petitioner could prove that he lacked sufficient proficiency in English to understand the nature and consequences of his plea. But I cannot agree with the majority that the record conclusively shows that his petition was frivolous. He should have been accorded an eviden-tiary hearing.

Before CARTER and HUFSTEDLER, Circuit Judges, and SCHNACKE, * District Judge.

Petitioner seeks to vacate his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 , alleging that his plea of guilty to a charge of armed bank robbery was involuntary because he did not understand the English language at the time of his plea, and that he was given a 25-year sentence even though his lawyer promised him a maximum sentence of seven" years if he entered a plea of guilty.

The District Court after reviewing the records and files in the case denied the petition without an evidentiary hearing.

The record discloses that petitioner, who was represented throughout by counsel, at no time complained of his lack of understanding of the English language, nor did he ever request an interpreter.

At his arraignment he was able, in order to be supplied counsel at government expense, to advise the magistrate that he was 35 years old, not an American citizen; that he was married, living with his wife and four minor children; that he had been six years in California, and had no relatives here except in-laws; that he was an unemployed janitor last employed six months ago; that he owned no real property, and…

504 F.2d 65 George FORRENS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee. No. 74-1089. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Oct. 1, 1974. 1 Leo N. Sherwood, San Francisco, Cal., for petitioner-appellant. 2 Thomas E. Kotoske, Asst. U.S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., for respondent-appellee. OPINION 3 Before CARTER and HUFSTEDLER, Circuit Judges, and SCHNACKE, 1 District Judge. SCHNACKE, District Judge: 4 Petitioner seeks to vacate his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255, alleging that his plea of guilty to a charge of armed bank robbery was involuntary because he did not understand the English language at the time of his plea, and that he was given a 25-year sentence even though his lawyer promised him a maximum sentence of seven years if he entered a plea of guilty. 5 The District Court after reviewing the records and files in the case denied the petition without an evidentiary hearing. 6 The record discloses that petitioner, who was represented throughout by counsel, at no time complained of his lack of understanding of the English language, nor did he ever request an interpreter. 7 At his arraignment he was able, in order to be supplied counsel at…