Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-90-02103/USCOURTS-ca10-90-02103-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Keith Bonnett
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALfbnited Stat.es C,nri: ol Appei.ls 

Tenth circuit 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v. 

KEITH BONNETT, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

APR 2 31991 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

No. 90-2103 

(D.C. No. 86-174 JB-04) 

(D. N.M.) 

Before ANDERSON, TACHA, Circuit Judges, and KANE,** District 

Judge. 

**Honorable John L. 

District Court for 

designation. 

Kane, Senior District Judge, United States 

the District of Colorado, sitting by 

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. 

submitted without oral argument. 

The case is therefore ordered 

This is an appeal from a district court order adopting the 

magistrate's recoDDnendation to deny defendant's amended 28 u.s.c. 

* 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: 90-2103 Document: 010110034317 Date Filed: 04/23/1991 Page: 1 
• 

S 2255 motion. Defendant seeks collateral relief from his 

conviction, following a guilty plea, on one count of conspiracy to 

possess with intent to distribute cocaine. See 18 u.s.c. § 846. 

Although not presented or argued in precisely the same terms 

throughout these proceedings, the issues raised by defendant's 

amended motion include: 

(1) The trial court failed to ensure that 

defendant understood the nature and consequences of the 

charges against him and neglected to establish the 

factual basis for defendant's plea, in violation of 

Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 and the Fifth and Sixth Amendments; 

(2) The agreement underlying defendant's plea was 

breached when defendant was sentenced to a term beyond 

the eight years the government agreed to recommend; 

(3) Defendant's plea was coerced by a combination 

of the conditions and duration of his pretrial 

confinement; 

(4) Defense counsel rendered ineffective 

assistance prior to and following defendant's plea; and 

(5) Defendant's constitutional 

speedy trial rights were violated. 

and statutory 

Upon consideration of the issues raised and materials submitted on 

this appeal, we concur in the district court's disposition of the 

instant motion. Defendant has failed to demonstrate the existence 

of a valid, meritorious ground for the relief sought. 

The judgment of the United States District Court for the 

District of New Mexico is AFFIRMED. 

The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

Entered for the Court 

Deanell Reece Tacha 

Circuit Judge 

2 

Appellate Case: 90-2103 Document: 010110034317 Date Filed: 04/23/1991 Page: 2