United States ex rel. Perez v. Follette
United States ex rel. Perez v. Follette
Opinion of the Court
OPINION
The record demonstrates that petitioner had the benefit of the advice not only of his retained counsel at and prior to the time of the entry of his guilty plea, but, in addition, of other lawyers who had previously represented him. The trial court accepted the plea only after a thorough questioning of petitioner established that he offered it freely and voluntarily. The conclusory and freewheeling allegations of petitioner, contradicted by his own attorney, do not require a hearing. Not a single evidentiary fact supports the claim that the plea was entered upon a promise of a suspended sentence.
The petition is dismissed.
. Cf. United States ex rel. Homchak v. People of State of New York, 323 F.2d 449 (2d Cir. 1963), cert. denied, 376 U.S. 919, 84 S.Ct. 677, 11 L.Ed.2d 615 (1964).
. Cf. United States v. Pisciotta, 199 F.2d 603, 606-607 (2d Cir. 1952); United States ex rel. Finn v. Klein, 271 F.Supp. 513 (S.D.N.Y. 1967); United States v. Shillitani, 16 F.R.D. 336 (S.D.N.Y. 1954).
Reference
- Full Case Name
- UNITED STATES of America ex rel. Roberto PEREZ v. Harold W. FOLLETTE, Warden, Green Haven Prison, Stormville, New York
- Status
- Published