Richardson v. Baldi
| Decision Date | 26 March 1956 |
| Docket Number | No. 309.,309. |
| Citation | 139 F. Supp. 928 |
| Parties | Gene R. RICHARDSON, Petitioner, v. Frederick S. BALDI, Warden, State Penitentiary, Rockview, Bellefonte, Penna., Respondent. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Pennsylvania |
Gene R. Richardson, pro se.
Frank P. Lawley, Jr., Deputy Atty. Gen., Victor H. Blanc, Dist. Atty., Jerome B. Apfel, Asst. Dist. Atty., Philadelphia, Pa., for respondent.
Petitioner is a State prisoner at the State penitentiary in this district. He has applied for a writ of habeas corpus in forma pauperis. The allegations of his petition may be summed up as follows:
He was arrested and had a hearing before a magistrate. He was subsequently indicted by a grand jury. The indictment charged an offense slightly at variance with the charge on which he was originally held by the magistrate. Apparently the difference was between "passing worthless checks and forgery" and "fraudulently making a written instrument uttering and publishing same." He had counsel of his own choosing and on a plea of not guilty went to trial on the indictment. During the course of the trial, on the advice of his counsel, he alleges "In confusement your relator reversed his plea during trial with the understanding that it was a lesser charge than original accusation."
There is no constitutional requirement that a grand jury must indict in the precise language used by a magistrate at a preliminary hearing,1 nor is there any constitutional question involved in the advice of counsel that he plead guilty. This was counsel of his own choosing and he cannot now simply allege error in the advice of counsel.2 Even had it been appointed counsel, the allegations here would not rise to the dignity of a violation of petititioner's rights under the due process clause.3 The appellant, with the advice of counsel, having plead guilty, that plea constituted an admission of his guilt, a waiver of all nonjurisdictional defects and defenses, and admitted all the facts averred in the indictment.4 There are no allegations in the present petition which would take petitioner's case out of this rule.
The application for writ of habeas corpus in forma pauperis must be denied.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Richmond v. Henderson
...attorney deprived him of due process. Mere inappropriate advice to plead guilty is not of constitutional dimensions: Richardson v. Baldi, 139 F.Supp. 928 (M.D.Pa., 1956). This is so where the choice made by the defendant is voluntary and with knowledge of the possible consequences, and desp......
-
Com. ex rel. Swilley v. Maroney
...United States ex rel. Walls v. Rundle, D.C., 241 F.Supp. 11; United States v. Rozanc, 210 F.Supp. 900 (W.D.Pa.1962); Richardson v. Baldi, 139 F.Supp. 928 (M.D.Pa.1956); see also 4 Wharton's Criminal Law and §§ 1900--1901 (1957); 10 P.L.E., Criminal Law, § 174. In Commonwealth ex rel. Blacks......
-
United States v. Rundle
...and of all facts averred in the indictment and constitutes a waiver of all nonjurisdictional defects and defenses. Richardson v. Baldi, 139 F.Supp. 928 (M.D.Pa.1956). Such a plea of guilty to murder is sufficient to sustain the charge of murder in the second degree. Commonwealth v. Jones, 3......
-
Application of Atchley, Civ. No. 7738.
...872; Diggs v. Welch, 80 U.S.App.D.C. 5, 148 F.2d 667, certiorari denied 325 U.S. 889, 65 S.Ct. 1576, 89 L.Ed. 2002; and Richardson v. Baldi, D.C., 139 F. Supp. 928), and thus result in petitioner being unable to make an intelligent decision as to his plea (Dorsey v. Gill, supra; and Monroe ......