United States v. Albert James Goodheim

Good Law
686 F.2d 776·11 Fed. R. Serv. 792·1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 25876
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 7, 198280-1408California2,108 words

Opinion

Opinion

Reinhardt, J.

Goodheim appealed his conviction on several counts which required, as a predicate, proof of a previous felony conviction. We reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether Goodheim’s guilty plea on the prior felony was voluntary and intelligent, in compliance with Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 , 89 S.Ct. 1709 , 23 L.Ed.2d 274 (1969). United States v. Goodheim, 651 F.2d 1294 (9th Cir. 1981). The reasons for the remand and the facts relevant to the additional issues which we reserved pending completion of the hearing on remand are fully set forth in that opinion.

On remand, the district court complied with our mandate and held an evidentiary hearing. The government presented two witnesses, the prosecutor and defense counsel in the proceeding in which Goodheim’s guilty plea was entered. Each testified that he had no present specific recollection of the original proceeding. Both witnesses, however, testified in detail as to the custom and practice of the state trial judge who accepted Goodheim’s plea of guilty. This testimony was based on their numerous personal appearances before the judge. Defense counsel also testified as to his practice in respect to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.