Anders Steinsvik v. Douglas Vinzant

640 F.2d 949 Anders STEINSVIK, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Douglas VINZANT, Respondent-Appellee. C.A. No. 79-2643. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Sept. 10, 1980. Decided Feb. 23, 1981. 1 Robert Adelman, Seattle, Wash., for petitioner-appellant. 2 Carol Horan Rainey, Tacoma, Wash., for respondent-appellee. 3 Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. 4 Before SNEED and FLETCHER, Circuit Judges and JAMESON, * District Judge. JAMESON, District Judge: 5 Anders Steinsvik has appealed from an order denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . We affirm. I. Procedural Background 6 On February 1, 1971, Steinsvik entered a plea of guilty to the crime of credit card forgery in King County, Washington. On September 16, 1971, the imposition of sentence was deferred and petitioner was placed on probation. On July 27, 1974, probation was revoked, and petitioner was given a maximum sentence of 20 years, to run concurrently with sentences imposed on pleas of guilty to the crime of grand larceny. 7 On…

Anders Steinsvik has appealed from an order denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . We affirm.

I. Procedural Background

On February 1, 1971, Steinsvik entered a plea of guilty to the crime of credit card forgery in King County, Washington. On September 16, 1971, the imposition of sentence was deferred and petitioner was placed on probation. On July 27,1974, probation was revoked, and petitioner was given a maximum sentence of 20 years, to run concurrently with sentences imposed on pleas of guilty to the crime of grand larceny.

On May 14,1976, Steinsvik filed a personal restraint petition in the Washington Court of Appeals. On September 9, 1976, this petition was denied as “frivolous on its face.” On June 27,1977 review was denied by the Washington Supreme Court.

On August 20, 1977, Steinsvik filed the instant petition, alleging that his guilty plea was not intelligently and voluntarily made, that he was mentally incompetent to enter the plea, and that he was not advised as to the maximum penalty for the offense to which he was pleading guilty. The petition…

dissenting:

I dissent on the ground that the record before the district court necessarily created a “real, substantial, and legitimate doubt as to [Steinsvik’s] mental capacity” at the time he entered his guilty plea, Zapata v. Estelle, 588 F.2d 1017, 1021-22 (5th Cir. 1979). I would remand for an evidentiary hearing on the issue of whether Steinsvik was competent.

I agree that Steinsvik’s behavior at the time he entered his plea would not have raised a good-faith doubt as to his competence. Steinsvik appeared to understand the consequences of his plea, and appeared to be able to make a rational choice among the alternatives presented to him. By the time Steinsvik’s habeas petition was filed, however, additional evidence on the issue of his competence had surfaced. In view of this additional evidence, I believe the district court erred in failing to hold an evidentiary hearing.

At the time of sentencing, the state court had before it the presentence report revealing that Steinsvik had a history of psychological problems and had made a number of suicide attempts. The state court did not know, however, that approximately thirty-three hours before the hearing at which Steinsvik…