Ray Vernon Upton v. Dr. George J. Beto, Director, Texas Department of Corrections

Fifth Circuit

Ray Vernon Upton v. Dr. George J. Beto, Director, Texas Department of Corrections

375 F.2d 117, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 6995

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMarch 23, 1967

Docket24095

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 375 F.2d 117 (Ray Vernon Upton v. Dr. George J. Beto, Director, Texas Department of Corrections) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ray Vernon Upton v. Dr. George J. Beto, Director, Texas Department of Corrections, 375 F.2d 117, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 6995 (5th Cir. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellant, represented by two attorneys appointed by the Court, was convicted upon his plea of guilty in Cul-berson County, Texas. Thereafter he petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus. A full plenary hearing was granted by the District Court, which appointed counsel to represent appellant in the prosecution of his petition. On the hearing appellant testified at length during which testimony he admitted that he was serving two sentences but only attacking one in his petition for a writ.

The District Court found with respect to the challenged conviction that appellant was accorded the effective assistance of competent counsel; that his plea of guilty to the offense charged was made knowingly, understandingly, and voluntarily after consultation with and upon the advice of his counsel; that appellant’s conviction was not obtained in violation of any of the rights guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States; and that appellant was then serving a valid sentence imposed in Midland County, Texas, which appellant was not attacking. The denial of the writ is amply supported by the record.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant, represented by two attorneys appointed by the Court, was convicted upon his plea of guilty in Cul-berson County, Texas. Thereafter he petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus. A full plenary hearing was granted by the District Court, which appointed counsel to represent appellant in the prosecution of his petition. On the hearing appellant testified at length during which testimony he admitted that he was serving two sentences but only attacking one in his petition for a writ.

The District Court found with respect to the challenged conviction that appellant was accorded the effective assistance of competent counsel; that his plea of guilty to the offense charged was made knowingly, understandingly, and voluntarily after consultation with and upon the advice of his counsel; that appellant’s conviction was not obtained in violation of any of the rights guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States; and that appellant was then serving a valid sentence imposed in Midland County, Texas, which appellant was not attacking. The denial of the writ is amply supported by the record.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

375 F.2d 117, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 6995, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ray-vernon-upton-v-dr-george-j-beto-director-texas-department-of-ca5-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack