U.S. v. Bartholomew, No. 91-3297

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
Writing for the CourtBefore JOLLY and DUHE; PER CURIAM
Citation974 F.2d 39
PartiesUNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Wayne F. BARTHOLOMEW, Defendant-Appellant.
Decision Date05 October 1992
Docket NumberNo. 91-3297

Page 39

974 F.2d 39
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Wayne F. BARTHOLOMEW, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 91-3297.
United States Court of Appeals,
Fifth Circuit.
Oct. 5, 1992.

Page 40

Wayne F. Bartholomew, pro se.

Patrice M. Harris and Peter G. Strasser, Asst. U.S. Attys., Harry Rosenberg, U.S. Atty., New Orleans, La., for plaintiff-appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.

Before JOLLY and DUHE, Circuit Judges, and PARKER *, District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Wayne F. Bartholomew, an indigent Federal inmate, appearing pro se, filed a Motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence by a person in Federal custody. The Court below determined that the record was sufficient for the purpose of adjudication of movant's claims, and that an evidentiary hearing was not necessary. The Court then dismissed Bartholomew's motion with prejudice. Bartholomew is before this Court pro se appealing the Judgment and Order of the District Court dismissing his motion with prejudice without an evidentiary hearing.

Page 41

FACTS

Appellant and two co-defendants abducted a bank officer and robbed a bank. Appellant cut and seriously wounded the kidnap victim, and left her for dead. Appellant, along with both codefendants, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit and commission of bank robbery and incidental crimes, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 and § 2113(a), (e). Bartholomew was sentenced to life in prison, and the Court recommended "no parole." No appeal was taken.

Appellant also faced state charges arising from the same incident. In the state case he raised the issue of competency, was examined by a doctor and found competent by the Court. His federal lawyer was aware of these proceedings, but did not raise the competency issue in Federal Court. At the Plea hearing she brought to the Court's attention Appellant's past history of mental illness and drug abuse, but represented to the Court that Appellant was competent to enter a plea.

ISSUES AND STANDARD OF REVIEW

Appellant sets out two specific issues for our review, but argues other related issues under each one. Instead of following Appellant's format, we will examine the lower Court's ruling on each issue presented in Appellant's § 2255 Motion, and determine if the Court erred either in denying Appellant an evidentiary hearing, or in denying the relief requested.

A motion brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 can be denied without a hearing only if the motion, files, and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief. U.S. v. Auten, 632 F.2d 478 (5th Cir.1980).

The Court reviews the action of the District Court for abuse of discretion. U.S. v. Donohoe, 458 F.2d 237 (10th Cir.1972), cert. denied 409 U.S. 865, 93 S.Ct. 157, 34 L.Ed.2d 113 (1972).

INCOMPETENCY

Bartholomew alleges that he was incompetent due to mental disease at the time he entered his plea of guilty. In support of his claim he attached exhibits which established that he had been diagnosed as suffering from schizophrenia, paranoid type and drug dependency, and admitted to Southeast Louisiana Hospital for treatment of this condition in 1973. After two months he was discharged and continued outpatient treatment until 1976. He also attached documentation from Leavenworth Correctional Facility that he had been diagnosed as schizophrenic, paranoid type while in prison in 1986. The Court in making a determination on Appellant's incompetency claim considered these documents as well as the transcription of the guilty plea hearing, and the competency proceeding in the parallel state court proceeding. The Court determined that the evidence on which Appellant relied, while it may have raised a doubt about his capacity in 1973-1976 was insufficient to raise a bona fide doubt about his competency immediately prior to and at the time of his plea in April of 1984.

The Court observed that no medical evidence was before the Court covering the period of time between 1976 and 1984. Appellant has not alleged to the Court below or in his appellant brief that there was any evidence other than what was already before the Court that could have cured the deficiency. Therefore we find no error in the Court's denial of an evidentiary hearing on this issue. Further we hold that the Court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that Appellant was competent to plead to the charged offenses and did so with a full understanding of the consequences.

INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL

The Court correctly set out and followed the framework established in...

To continue reading

Request your trial
107 practice notes
  • U.S. v. Lumbreras-Amaro, Criminal No. H-07-0055.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. Southern District of Texas
    • November 6, 2008
    ...the files, and the records of the case conclusively show that the petitioner is entitled to no relief. See United States v. Bartholomew, 974 F.2d 39, 41 (5th Cir.1992) (per curiam) (citing United States v. Auten, 632 F.2d 478 (5th Cir.1980)). In this case, the record is adequate to dispose ......
  • Ricks v. United States, A-10-CA-352-LY
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. Western District of Texas
    • July 26, 2013
    ...motion, files, and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief." United States v. Bartholomew, 974 F.2d 39, 41 (5th Cir. 1992). Conclusory allegations, unsubstantiated by evidence, do not support the request for an evidentiary hearing. United States......
  • United States v. Aldridge, CRIMINAL NUMBER H-10-185-01
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. Southern District of Texas
    • July 9, 2015
    ...unless the motion, the files, and the record conclusively show the prisoner is entitled to no relief. United States v. Bartholomew, 974 F.2d 39, 41 (5th Cir. 1992). Upon review of the Aldridges' motions to vacate, and the files and records of this case, the court concludes that an evidentia......
  • Flores-Diaz v. U.S., Civil Action No. L-05-cv-177.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. Southern District of Texas
    • May 14, 2007
    ...if the motion, files, and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief. United States v. Bartholomew, 974 F.2d 39, 41 (5th Cir.1992) (per curiam). Because the Court concludes the files and records show that Flores is not entitled to relief, an evidentiary......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
107 cases
  • U.S. v. Lumbreras-Amaro, Criminal No. H-07-0055.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. Southern District of Texas
    • November 6, 2008
    ...the files, and the records of the case conclusively show that the petitioner is entitled to no relief. See United States v. Bartholomew, 974 F.2d 39, 41 (5th Cir.1992) (per curiam) (citing United States v. Auten, 632 F.2d 478 (5th Cir.1980)). In this case, the record is adequate to dispose ......
  • Ricks v. United States, A-10-CA-352-LY
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. Western District of Texas
    • July 26, 2013
    ...motion, files, and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief." United States v. Bartholomew, 974 F.2d 39, 41 (5th Cir. 1992). Conclusory allegations, unsubstantiated by evidence, do not support the request for an evidentiary hearing. United States......
  • United States v. Aldridge, CRIMINAL NUMBER H-10-185-01
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. Southern District of Texas
    • July 9, 2015
    ...unless the motion, the files, and the record conclusively show the prisoner is entitled to no relief. United States v. Bartholomew, 974 F.2d 39, 41 (5th Cir. 1992). Upon review of the Aldridges' motions to vacate, and the files and records of this case, the court concludes that an evidentia......
  • Flores-Diaz v. U.S., Civil Action No. L-05-cv-177.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. Southern District of Texas
    • May 14, 2007
    ...if the motion, files, and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief. United States v. Bartholomew, 974 F.2d 39, 41 (5th Cir.1992) (per curiam). Because the Court concludes the files and records show that Flores is not entitled to relief, an evidentiary......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT