James Zell Tuggle v. Dr. George J. Beto, Director, Texas Department of Corrections

Fifth Circuit

James Zell Tuggle v. Dr. George J. Beto, Director, Texas Department of Corrections

374 F.2d 618, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 6998

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided March 23, 1967·No. 24044_1·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The Appellant’s petition for writ of habeas corpus asserted two grounds. The first was involuntariness of a confession because Tuggle was required by police officers to give a statement before being allowed to contact counsel or friends. The second was the involuntariness of his subsequent plea of guilty entered by him upon his retained counsel’s advice out of apprehension that he might get the death penalty.

*619 As the papers liberally construed do not adequately assert that the guilty plea was induced by the confession alleged to have been coerced, Carpenter v. Wainwright, 5 Cir., 1967, 372 F.2d 940 [Feb. 2, 1967]; Murphy v. Wainwright, 5 Cir., 1967, 372 F.2d 942 [Feb. 2, 1967], the guilty plea eliminates the question as to the voluntariness of the confession. Busby v. Holman, 5 Cir., 1966, 356 F.2d 75. That decision likewise disposes of the second question. Law v. Beto, 5 Cir., 1966, 370 F.2d 369 [Dec. 15, 1966]; White v. Beto, 5 Cir., 1966, 367 F.2d 557 [Oct. 25, 1966].

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The Appellant’s petition for writ of habeas corpus asserted two grounds. The first was involuntariness of a confession because Tuggle was required by police officers to give a statement before being allowed to contact counsel or friends. The second was the involuntariness of his subsequent plea of guilty entered by him upon his retained counsel’s advice out of apprehension that he might get the death penalty.

*619 As the papers liberally construed do not adequately assert that the guilty plea was induced by the confession alleged to have been coerced, Carpenter v. Wainwright, 5 Cir., 1967, 372 F.2d 940 [Feb. 2, 1967]; Murphy v. Wainwright, 5 Cir., 1967, 372 F.2d 942 [Feb. 2, 1967], the guilty plea eliminates the question as to the voluntariness of the confession. Busby v. Holman, 5 Cir., 1966, 356 F.2d 75. That decision likewise disposes of the second question. Law v. Beto, 5 Cir., 1966, 370 F.2d 369 [Dec. 15, 1966]; White v. Beto, 5 Cir., 1966, 367 F.2d 557 [Oct. 25, 1966].

Affirmed.

James Zell Tuggle v. Dr. George J. Beto, Director, Texas Department of Corrections, 374 F.2d 618, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 6998 (5th Cir. 1967).

Pincite

374 F.2d 618 (James Zell Tuggle v. Dr. George J. Beto, Director, Texas Department of Corrections) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related