Wilford Lee Baize v. Dr. George J. Beto, Director, Texas Department of Corrections

Fifth Circuit

Wilford Lee Baize v. Dr. George J. Beto, Director, Texas Department of Corrections

448 F.2d 642, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 8058

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 15, 1971

Docket71-1238_1

StatusPublished

This text of 448 F.2d 642 (Wilford Lee Baize 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

Wilford Lee Baize v. Dr. George J. Beto, Director, Texas Department of Corrections, 448 F.2d 642, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 8058 (5th Cir. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

In this appeal from a denial in the district court of habeas relief Baize contends that the finding of the district Court that his confession was voluntary is clearly erroneous; that the state court failed to properly follow the state sentencing procedures; that Baize had ineffective counsel in two cases used to enhance his punishment; that because • of coercion by the state prosecutor Baize withdrew an appeal from a criminal conviction.

The district court held an evidentiary hearing and fully considered all of the contentions presented by Baize. We are convinced that the district court was correct in denying relief. The judgment is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

In this appeal from a denial in the district court of habeas relief Baize contends that the finding of the district Court that his confession was voluntary is clearly erroneous; that the state court failed to properly follow the state sentencing procedures; that Baize had ineffective counsel in two cases used to enhance his punishment; that because • of coercion by the state prosecutor Baize withdrew an appeal from a criminal conviction.

The district court held an evidentiary hearing and fully considered all of the contentions presented by Baize. We are convinced that the district court was correct in denying relief. The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

448 F.2d 642, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 8058, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilford-lee-baize-v-dr-george-j-beto-director-texas-department-of-ca5-1971.