Case Name: Robert RELIFORD, Petitioner and Appellant, v. Walter E. CRAVEN, Warden, Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1970-12-09
Citations: 434 F.2d 1315
Docket Number: No. 24225
Parties: Robert RELIFORD, Petitioner and Appellant, v. Walter E. CRAVEN, Warden, Appellee.
Judges: Before CHAMBERS, BROWNING and KILKENNY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 434
Pages: 1315–1316

Head Matter:
Robert RELIFORD, Petitioner and Appellant, v. Walter E. CRAVEN, Warden, Appellee.
No. 24225.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Dec. 9, 1970.
Robert J. Gloistein (argued), San Francisco, Cal., for appellant.
Robert Granucci (argued), Deputy Atty. Gen., Thomas . C. Lynch, Atty. Gen., Deraid E. Granberg, Michael J. Kell, Deputy Attys. Gen., San Francisco, Cal., for appellee.
Before CHAMBERS, BROWNING and KILKENNY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The decision of the district court is affirmed.
Boykin v. Alabama (1969), 395 U.S. 238, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274, upon which appellant heavily relies, is distinguishable on its facts, and it is not retroactive. Miller v. Cupp (9th Cir. 1970), 427 F.2d 710.
The trial court disbelieved petitioner on his claim of naivete in entering his guilty plea. It believed contrary general testimony of counsel. Under the circumstances, if the burden of proof could be said to be on the state, we think it was sustained.