Case Name: Floyd Clayton FORSBERG, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1972-11-24
Citations: 469 F.2d 1083
Docket Number: No. 72-2168
Parties: Floyd Clayton FORSBERG, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 469
Pages: 1083–1084

Head Matter:
Floyd Clayton FORSBERG, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 72-2168.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Nov. 24, 1972.
Floyd Clayton Forsberg, in pro. per.
Sidney I. Lezak, U. S. Atty., Michael L. Morehouse, Asst. U. S. Atty., Portland, Ore., for respondent-appellee.
Before MERRILL, CARTER and WRIGHT, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
This is an appeal by a federal prisoner from the denial of a motion to vacate his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Appellant claims that his plea of guilty was void because a requested and ordered psychiatric examination was never held. He also contends that he was not adequately admonished as to the consequences of his plea as required by F.R.Cr.P. 11.
His contentions are without merit.
The petitioner filed an earlier 2255 motion which was denied upon the merits. The instant one was denied as a mere duplication of the first. Petitioner in several letters written to the Dis trict Court Judge admitted that the claimed deprivation of the psychiatric examination was merely a device to enable the judge to vacate petitioner's original sentence and impose a lower one based on prison rehabilitation. The District Court properly refused to utilize 28 U.S.C. § 2255 for such a purpose. United States v. Marchese, 341 F.2d 782, 788 (9th Cir. 1965).
We agree that the first motion was frivolous as was that portion of the second motion which was repetition.
One claim newly asserted in the second petition — failure to comply with F.R.Cr.P. 11 in accepting the guilty plea — is without merit. The transcript of the proceeding shows full compliance. Williams v. United States, 466 F.2d 672 (9th Cir. 1972).
The judgment is affirmed.