Jose Tamayo-Reyes v. J.C. Keeney

Bad Law
91 Daily Journal DAR 2586·926 F.2d 1492·1991 WL 26031·1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 3258·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1702
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 4, 199190-35315California5,514 words

Opinion

Opinion

Trott, J.

Jose Tamayo-Reyes appeals the denial of his habeas corpus petition, claiming the district court erred in refusing to grant an evidentiary hearing on whether his nolo contendere plea to manslaughter was unconstitutional. We reverse in part and remand because the district court improperly deferred to certain state court factual findings based on 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d) (1988), instead of holding an evidentiary hearing on the merits of Reyes’s claim as required by Townsend v. Sain, 372 U.S. 293 , 83 S.Ct. 745 , 9 L.Ed.2d 770 (1963).

FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS BELOW

Reyes is a Cuban immigrant with little education and almost no knowledge of English. In 1984 he allegedly stabbed and killed a man in a bar fight. He was arrested, charged with murder, and provided with a defense attorney and interpreter.

Reyes’s attorney, Mr. Tommy Hawk, decided Reyes should plead nolo contendere to Manslaughter in the First Degree. Or. Rev.Stat. § 163.118(l)(a) (1989). Reyes signed a plea form that explained in English the rights he was waiving by entering the plea. The state court then held a hearing to approve the plea, at which Reyes was represented by Hawk and his interpreter, Mr. Ben Sanchez. The judge…

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.