James Dominique Mayfield v. United States

Good Law
51 F.3d 281·1995 WL 139260·1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23726
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 29, 199594-35421California782 words

Opinion

Opinion

51 F.3d 281 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. James Dominique MAYFIELD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee. No. 94-35421. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted March 21, 1995. * Decided March 29, 1995. Before: SNEED, POOLE, and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 James Dominique Mayfield, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 motion to vacate his guilty plea for first degree murder. Mayfield contends that the district court judge did not make an adequate factual finding into appellant's guilty plea. Additionally, Mayfield contends that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel because counsel misinformed appellant about the potential for the death penalty if he was proven guilty at trial. We review de novo both the denial of a Sec. 2255 motion and a determination that the defendant received his Sixth Amendment right to effective…

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.