Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-90-05152/USCOURTS-ca10-90-05152-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 510
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 

---

. PILED 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Umted Scates Co~rt ~f .Appeals Tenth Ctram 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, } 

r:t:s 221991 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

v. 

LYMAN 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

BRADSHAW, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

} 

) 

No. 90-5152 

(D.C. No. 90-C-25-C) 

( N • D • Okla • ) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before ANDERSON, ~, and BRORBY, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the br~efs 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): lOth Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

This appeal is from an order of the district court denying 

defendant Bradshaw's motion pursuant to 28 u.s.c. § 2255 to vacate 

or set aside his sentence. Defendant appeals on the grounds that 

no grand jury was constituted and no proper indictment was 

returned against him. Defendant further alleges that he was 

* 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. lOth Cir. R. 

36.3. 

Appellate Case: 90-5152 Document: 01019728679 Date Filed: 02/22/1991 Page: 1 
denied effective assistance of counsel in the guilty plea 

proceeding and that he was not fully informed with respect to his 

plea of guilty. We affirm. 

Defendant's allegations regarding the insufficiency of the 

indictment are merit·less. Defendant signed a waiver of the 

indictment and was charged by a valid information. The transcript 

of defendant's September 6, 1990 hearing regarding a change of 

plea reveals clearly that he waived his right to a grand jury 

indictment. 

Defendant's allegations that he was denied effective 

assistance of counsel because his attorney at the guilty plea 

proceeding failed to inform him adequately with respect to the 

issues and consequences related to a guilty plea also lack merit. 

The sentencing judge found that defendant's guilty plea was 

entered knowingly and voluntarily. At the plea hearing, the judge 

fully apprised defendant of his rights regarding entry of a plea 

pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11. Defendant 

testified that he had consulted with his attorney and was 

satisfied with his attorney's representation. He further 

testified that he was in no way coerced to enter a guilty plea. 

Defendant has failed to allege any basis for a determination that 

his counsel's advice was "not 'within the range of competence 

demanded of attorneys in criminal cases.'" Tollett~ Henderson, 

411 U.S. 258, 266 (1973) {quoting McMann~ Richardson, 397 U.S. 

759, 771 (1970)). We AFFIRM. The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

-2-

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

Deanell Reece Tacha 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 90-5152 Document: 01019728679 Date Filed: 02/22/1991 Page: 2