U.S. v. Fairchild, No. 84-7624
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit) |
| Writing for the Court | Before HILL, KRAVITCH and EDMONDSON; PER CURIAM |
| Citation | 803 F.2d 1121 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ralph Leo FAIRCHILD, Defendant-Appellant. Non-Argument Calendar. |
| Docket Number | No. 84-7624 |
| Decision Date | 10 November 1986 |
Page 1121
v.
Ralph Leo FAIRCHILD, Defendant-Appellant.
Non-Argument Calendar.
Eleventh Circuit.
Page 1122
Charles S. Whitespunner, Jr., Mobile, Ala., for the U.S.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama.
Before HILL, KRAVITCH and EDMONDSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Ralph Leo Fairchild, proceeding pro se on appeal, seeks to withdraw his guilty plea, have his conviction for engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise in violation of 21 U.S.C.A. Sec. 848 reversed, and a trial. We find that Fairchild made a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary plea of guilty, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Fairchild's motion to withdraw the plea. We further find that Fairchild has failed to show ineffective assistance of counsel. We affirm.
Fairchild was indicted on November 22, 1982, on two counts of conspiracy to distribute and possession with intent to distribute marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C.A. Sec. 846, and two counts of conspiracy to import marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C.A. Sec. 963. Fairchild, represented by James D. Brooks, was arraigned, pleaded not guilty, and trial was set for February 7, 1983. Fairchild did not appear for trial and was later sentenced to five years in prison for this failure to appear. A warrant was issued for Fairchild's arrest on February 8, 1983. On April 6, 1984, another indictment was returned. This indictment charged Fairchild with one count of conspiracy to import 1,000 pounds of marijuana and one count of conspiracy to distribute and possession with intent to distribute 1,000 pounds of marijuana. Fairchild was arrested on May 10, 1984, and arraigned on May 14, again represented by Mr. Brooks. On June 8, a superseding indictment was returned. Fairchild was arraigned and again entered a plea of not guilty. The superseding indictment charged Fairchild in Count One with engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise. It also charged Fairchild with five counts of conspiracy to distribute and possession with intent to distribute marijuana and five counts of conspiracy to import marijuana. On August 20, Fairchild withdrew his plea of not guilty and pleaded guilty to Count One. The remaining charges were dropped as a part of the plea bargain. Fairchild received the minimum 1 sentence for the offense, ten years without parole. 21 U.S.C.A. Sec. 848(a), (c).
Fairchild claims that his guilty plea was not knowing, intelligent, and voluntary because he received ineffective assistance of counsel from Brooks. Specifically, he alleges that Brooks was ineffective because
Page 1123
he (1) did not adequately discuss the legal and factual basis of the indictment; (2) exaggerated the maximum possible penalties; (3) did not personally interview all the potential witnesses; (4) failed to advise him that the conspiracy charges in the indictment could not be used as predicate offenses for the continuing criminal enterprise charge; and (5) did not adequately advise him of his right to appeal."[A]n accused who has not received reasonably effective assistance from counsel in deciding to plead guilty cannot be bound by...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
White v. United States, Criminal 18-cr-101-CG-MU
...997 (11th Cir. 1992); see also, e.g., United States v. Brown, 752 F.3d 1344, 1347 (11th Cir. 2014) (quoting United States v. Fairchild, 803 F.2d 1121, 1124 (11th Cir. 1986) (per curiam) (“A guilty plea, since it admits all the elements of a formal criminal charge, waives all non-jurisdictio......
-
Boles v. United States, CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:18-00073-WS-N
...criminal charge, waives all non-jurisdictional defects in the proceedings against a defendant.'" (quoting United States v. Fairchild, 803 F.2d 1121, 1124 (11th Cir. 1986) (per curiam)); United States v. Saac, 632 F.3d 1203, 1208 (11th Cir. 2011) ("Page 6 'Generally, entering a guilty plea w......
-
Lora v. United States, CASE NO. 16-20480-Civ-GAYLES
...the constitutional effectiveness of the assistance he received from his attorney in deciding to plead guilty, United States v. Fairchild, 803 F.2d 1121, 1123 (11th Cir. 1986). To determine that a guilty plea is knowing and voluntary, a district court must comply with Rule 11 and address its......
-
State v. Turner
...v. Taylor, 814 F.2d 172, 174 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 865, 108 S.Ct. 186, 98 L.Ed.2d 138 (1987); United States v. Fairchild, 803 F.2d 1121, 1124 (11th 76 684 S.W.2d 663 (Tenn.Crim.App.1984). 77 684 S.W.2d at 667 (citation omitted). 78 Committee Comment to Tenn.R.Crim.P. 37(b)(2). ......
-
White v. United States, Criminal 18-cr-101-CG-MU
...997 (11th Cir. 1992); see also, e.g., United States v. Brown, 752 F.3d 1344, 1347 (11th Cir. 2014) (quoting United States v. Fairchild, 803 F.2d 1121, 1124 (11th Cir. 1986) (per curiam) (“A guilty plea, since it admits all the elements of a formal criminal charge, waives all non-jurisdictio......
-
Boles v. United States, CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:18-00073-WS-N
...charge, waives all non-jurisdictional defects in the proceedings against a defendant.'" (quoting United States v. Fairchild, 803 F.2d 1121, 1124 (11th Cir. 1986) (per curiam)); United States v. Saac, 632 F.3d 1203, 1208 (11th Cir. 2011) ("Page 6 'Generally, entering a guilty plea ......
-
Lora v. United States, CASE NO. 16-20480-Civ-GAYLES
...the constitutional effectiveness of the assistance he received from his attorney in deciding to plead guilty, United States v. Fairchild, 803 F.2d 1121, 1123 (11th Cir. 1986). To determine that a guilty plea is knowing and voluntary, a district court must comply with Rule 11 and address its......
-
State v. Turner
...v. Taylor, 814 F.2d 172, 174 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 865, 108 S.Ct. 186, 98 L.Ed.2d 138 (1987); United States v. Fairchild, 803 F.2d 1121, 1124 (11th 76 684 S.W.2d 663 (Tenn.Crim.App.1984). 77 684 S.W.2d at 667 (citation omitted). 78 Committee Comment to Tenn.R.Crim.P. 37(b)(2). ......