Chansoulme v. Elo

35 F. App'x 228
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedMay 23, 2002
DocketNo. 00-2386
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 35 F. App'x 228 (Chansoulme v. Elo) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Chansoulme v. Elo, 35 F. App'x 228 (6th Cir. 2002).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner Jorge Chansoulme appeals from the order of the district court denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner makes three arguments on appeal. First, he asserts that the writ should issue because his plea was induced by incorrect advice. Second, he argues that because of this bad advice, his plea was not knowingly and intelligently made. Third, he claims that [229-233]*229-233he should have been granted an evidentiary hearing in the district court.

Having reviewed the record, the briefs, and the applicable law, and having had the benefit of oral argument, we conclude that the district court properly denied Petitioner’s petition, for all the reasons stated in the district court opinion dated October 13, 2000.

Accordingly, we HEREBY AFFIRM the judgment of the district court denying Petitioner’s request for the grant of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, for the reasons stated in the district court opinion dated October 13, 2000.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Chansuolme v. Elo, Warden
537 U.S. 1119 (Supreme Court, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
35 F. App'x 228, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chansoulme-v-elo-ca6-2002.