Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

William H. James v. S. Lamont Smith, Warden, Georgia State Prison

455 F.2d 502

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1972-02-04
Topic
general

PER CURIAM: The instant appeal is from the denial of habeas corpus relief. Appellant’s claim for relief is based on the asserted failure of the state to live up to a “plea bargain.” The district court denied relief without an evidentiary hearing, relying upon the record of appellant’s state court proceedings, supplemented by affidavits from the prosecuting and defense attorneys at his trial. On December 20, 1971, the Supreme Court rendered its decision in Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 92 S.Ct. 495, 30 L.Ed.2d 427, which involved the validity of a guilty plea obtained through a plea bargaining process. There the judgment was vacated and the case remanded to the state court to determine whether the circumstances of the case require that there be “specific performance” of the agreement on the plea.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed William H. James v. S. Lamont Smith, Warden, Georgia State Prison. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
11 opinions
JAMES v. SMITH,455 F.2d 502(5th Cir. 1972)
WILLIAM H. JAMES, PETITIONER-APPELLANT, v. S. LAMONT SMITH, WARDEN, GEORGIA
STATE PRISON, ET AL., RESPONDENTS-APPELLEES.
No. 71-2639.
Summary Calendar.fn*
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
February 4, 1972.
Page 503
William H. James, pro se.

Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., of Ga., William F. Bartee, Jr., Courtney Wilder Stanton, Ass't. Attys. Gen., Atlanta, Ga., Harold N. Hill, Jr., Executive Asst. Atty. Gen., Atlanta, Ga., for respondents-appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.
Before JOHN R. BROWN, Chief Judge, and INGRAHAM and RONEY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
[1] The instant appeal is from the denial of habeas corpus relief. Appellant's claim for relief is based on the asserted failure of the state to live up to a "plea bargain." The district court denied relief without an evidentiary hearing, relying upon the record of appellant's state court proceedings, supplemented by affidavits from the prosecuting and defense attorneys at his trial.

[2] On December 20, 1971, the Supreme Court rendered its decision in Santobello v. New York,404 U.S. 257,92 S.Ct. 495,30 L.Ed.2d 427, which involved the validity of a guilty plea obtained through a plea bargaining process. There the judgment was vacated and the case remanded to the state court to determine whether the circumstances of the case require that there be "specific performance" of the agreement on the plea.

[3] The appeal of the appellant in the case at bar presents a similar set of issues. Consequently, in light ofSantobelloand for whatever further evidentiary proceedings may be deemed warranted, we remand this case to the district court for reconsideration.

[4] Vacated and remanded for further proceedings.Page 506
  1. Rule 18, 5th Cir.; see Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of N.Y.,431 F.2d 409, Part I (5th Cir. 1970). ↩