Franklin Eugene Watts, Jr. v. United States

Good Law
841 F.2d 275·1988 WL 16087·1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 2515
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 2, 198886-15019California1,797 words

Opinion

Opinion

Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 a judge may hear a motion by expanding the record with documentary testimony and evidence. In this ease we consider the circumstances in which such a hearing is proper. We conclude that Judge Dueñas satisfied the requirements of section 2255 by ruling on Watts’ motion based on the record of the plea hearing, affidavits from all witnesses to the plea agreement, interrogatories of Watts and his wife, the judge’s own recollections of the proceedings, Watts’ Rule 35 motion and letters written to the judge by Watts. We affirm the denial of the motion.

BACKGROUND

Watts pleaded guilty to second degree murder and attempted murder. His wife pleaded guilty to the offense of accessory after the fact. The sentencing court conducted thorough Rule 11 plea hearings at which Watts and his wife testified under oath. The court questioned both of them to establish that they entered their pleas voluntarily and knowingly and to establish factual bases for their guilty pleas.

Watts and his wife declared individually that each had read and understood his or her plea agreement. Watts explained to the court that he understood that under the plea agreement he could be sentenced…

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.