Clinton Charles Taliaferro v. United States

Ninth Circuit

Clinton Charles Taliaferro v. United States

457 F.2d 504, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 10011

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedApril 19, 1972

Docket71-2756

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 457 F.2d 504 (Clinton Charles Taliaferro v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Clinton Charles Taliaferro v. United States, 457 F.2d 504, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 10011 (9th Cir. 1972).

Pincite

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.

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

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

457 F.2d 504, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 10011, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clinton-charles-taliaferro-v-united-states-ca9-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack