Upton
Upton v. Hoyt
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Tamara Upton (“Upton”), an Oregon state prisoner, pled guilty to aggravated *35 murder and stipulated to a life sentence without the possibility of parole. She appeals the district court’s denial of her 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition, alleging that her plea was not knowing, intelligent, and voluntary. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of this case, we need not recount it here.
Upton contends that her plea was involuntary because she was not made “fully aware of the direct consequences” of her plea. She maintains that she believed that her guilty plea entitled her to an appeal of her sentence on the merits, not an appeal that turned out to be unreviewable.
Upton correctly observes that a guilty plea is voluntary only if “it is entered by one fully aware of the direct consequences of [the] plea.” Torrey v. Estelle, 842 F.2d 234, 235 (9th Cir.1988) (emphasis added); see also Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742, 755 , 90 S.Ct. 1463 , 25 L.Ed.2d 747 (1970) (observing that, unless induced by threats, misrepresentation or improper prosecutorial promises, “a plea of guilty entered by one fully aware of the direct consequences ... must…