U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1972

Clinton Charles Taliaferro v. United States

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided April 19, 1972 · Hamley, Merrill, Per Curiam, Trask

457 F.2d 504; 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 10011 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Leonard J. Rubin, San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiff-appellant., James L. Browning, Jr., U. S. Atty., Paul J. Fitzpatrick, Asst. U. S. Atty., San Francisco, Cal., for defendant-appel-lee.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Eathorne v. State (Ala. Crim. App. 1984)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Clinton Taliaferro appeals a district court order denying relief sought by him under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 upon the ground that his plea of guilty to a charge of possession of counterfeit currency (18 U.S.C. § 472) had not been voluntarily made *505 as required by Fed.R.Crim.P. 11. The district court opinion is reported as Taliaferro v. United States, 330 F.Supp. 408 (N.D.Cal. 1971). We are quite convinced that the district court’s findings and order are not clearly erroneous, Conley v. United States, 407 F.2d 45 (9th Cir.), cert. denied 396 U.S. 853, 90 S.Ct. 113, 24 L.Ed.2d 102 (1969), and affirm for the reasons set out in that opinion.

The judgment is affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.