Case Name: George B. CRIDLAND, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1972-01-04
Citations: 453 F.2d 888
Docket Number: No. 71-2951
Parties: George B. CRIDLAND, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 453
Pages: 888–888

Head Matter:
George B. CRIDLAND, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 71-2951
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Jan. 4, 1972.
J. V. Eskenazi, Fed. Public Defender, Charlene Sorrentino, Miami, Fla., for petitioner-appellant.
Robert Shevin, Atty. Gen. of Fla., Tallahassee, Fla., Joseph R. DeLucca, Asst. Atty. Gen., Miami, Fla., for respondent-appellee.
Before WISDOM, COLEMAN, and SIMPSON, Circuit Judges.
Rule 18, 5th Cir.; See Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York et al., 5 Cir., 1970, 431 F.2d 409, Part I.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
In this habeas corpus appeal, George B. Cridland, represented by the Assistant Federal Public Defender, who has filed an excellent brief, contends that his pleas of guilty to multiple Florida offenses were involuntarily entered and that he also had incompetent representation prior to the entry of the pleas.
Judge Cabot of the Southern District of Florida accorded Cridland an eviden-tiary hearing, at which he was represented by counsel. Findings of fact and conclusions of law were thereafter entered, containing the following:
"Testimony elicited at the eviden-tiary hearing before this Court on the instant petition yields the inescapable conclusion that petitioners counsel had sufficient time to insure an adequate defense [proceeding to recite the circumstances] ."
The District Court further found the guilty pleas to have been voluntarily entered.
A review of the record demonstrates that these findings are not clearly erroneous and the judgment denying ha-beas relief must accordingly be
Affirmed.