Legal Opinion

Byrd v. Cardwell

District Court, D. Arizona

Decided March 11, 1977No. Civ. No. 77-13 PHX (WEC)Published

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

CRAIG, Chief Judge.

The question raised by this petition for writ of habeas corpus is whether or not petitioner was unconstitutionally denied a hearing on the issue of his competence to plead guilty under Sieling v. Eyman, 478 F.2d 211 (9th Cir. 1973).

Sieling requires a hearing whenever a trial judge has, or should have, a good faith doubt as to the competence of a defendant to knowingly and intelligently waive his-constitutional rights by pleading guilty. The defendant must be found to possess that degree of competence “. which enables him to make decisions of very serious import.”…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. North Carolina v. AlfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. Geza De Kaplany v. J. J. Enomoto, Director of California Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1976
  3. Gilbert F. Sieling, Sr. v. Frank A. Eyman, Warden, Arizona State PrisonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1973
  4. James John Makal v. State of Arizona and Harold G. Cardwell, Superintendent, Arizona State PrisonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1976
  5. State v. ByrdCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1974

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API