Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-92-05090/USCOURTS-ca10-92-05090-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 

---

FIL D 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United St~h ~.!;u1{ Appealf 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

LARRY C. BLACK, ) 

) 

Petitioner-Appellant, ) 

) 

V • ) 

) 

STEVE HARGETT; ATTORNEY GENERAL) 

OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA, ) 

) 

Respondents-Appellees. ) 

NOV 9 1992 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

No. 92-5090 

(D.C. No. 90-C-0970 - E) 

(N. D. Okla.) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before MOORE, TACHA, and BRORBY, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

Larry C. Black appeals an order of the United States District 

Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma denying his petition 

for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. We 

exercise jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm. 

Petitioner pleaded guilty to two counts of murder in the 

first degree and is now serving two consecutive life sentences. 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 

36.3. 

Appellate Case: 92-5090 Document: 010110145713 Date Filed: 11/09/1992 Page: 1 
After exhausting his state remedies, Mr. Black filed this petition 

for writ of habeas corpus, asserting six grounds for relief: (1) 

his attorney improperly entered the guilty plea; (2) he did not 

understand the elements of the crime to which he pleaded guilty; 

(3) his conviction was based on insufficient evidence; (4) his 

consecutive life sentences were improper; (5) the state failed to 

adequately assess his competence prior to receiving his guilty 

plea; and (6) the state trial court failed to advise him of his 

right to counsel on appeal. 

Mr. Black's petition was referred to a United States 

Magistrate Judge, who recommended that the petition be denied 

because: (1) the petitioner entered his guilty plea himself in 

open court; (2) the petitioner was sufficiently notified of the 

elements of the crimes charged and demonstrated his understanding 

of the guilty plea such that it was voluntary; (3) petitioner's 

guilty plea provided sufficient evidence to convict; (4) 

petitioner's state sentences did not present a constitutional 

question; (5) the trial court adequately assessed petitioner's 

competence to enter a guilty plea; and (6) petitioner had no right 

to be notified of his right to counsel on appeal after entering a 

guilty plea. The district court adopted the magistrate's report 

and denied the petition. 

After reviewing the briefs and the record on appeal, we 

AFFIRM for substantially the reasons given in both the original 

and amended Report and Recommendation of U.S. Magistrate Judge. 

The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

-2-

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

Deanell Reece Tacha 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 92-5090 Document: 010110145713 Date Filed: 11/09/1992 Page: 2