Gomez

Gonzales v. Gomez

Good Law
23 F. App'x 647
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 15, 2001No. 00-56182; DC No. CV 93-4494 WDKCalifornia643 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Pursuant to a plea agreement, Edward Gonzales pled nolo contendere to second-degree murder for the tilling of Ruben Oliva. Gonzales now asserts that his plea was involuntary and was made in order to escape from acts of violence threatened by the victim’s family. On appeal from the initial dismissal of his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 , we affirmed the dismissal of his ineffective assistance of counsel claim, but remanded his plea coercion claim for an evidentiary hearing. We noted that “[t]he allegations in the petition, if proven, could call for habeas relief. There is little doubt that a serious problem existed in and around the courtroom that might have caused this defendant to sense real danger to his weE being.” Gonzales v. Gomez, 129 F.3d 125 (table), 1997 WL 683313, at *1 (9th Cir.1997).

After holding an evidentiary hearing on remand, the district court found that Gonzales had been threatened. It also found, however, that those threats did not intimidate Gonzales and, thus, did not render his plea involuntary. Gonzales now timely appeals. Because the district court’s finding is not clearly erroneous, we affirm the denial of the petition for a writ of…

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.