William F. Hess v. Manfred Maass, Superintendent

70 F.3d 1278 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. William F. HESS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Manfred MAASS, Superintendent, Respondent-Appellee. No. 94-35359. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted: Oct. 18, 1995. * Decided: Nov. 15, 1995. Before: CHOY, SKOPIL, and FERGUSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Willie Hess, an Oregon state prisoner, appeals the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 habeas petition challenging his state conviction for sexual abuse. Hess claims that his no contest plea was unknowing and involuntary because he not informed of the possibility of a minimum sentence. The state post-conviction court, however, found that Hess "was advised of the possibility of a minimum sentence before he entered his plea." That finding is entitled to a presumption of correctness, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 (d), which Hess has failed to rebut. See Wells v. Maass, 28 F.3d 1005, 1011 (9th Cir.1994). The fact that Hess was informed by…