Jimenez-Isale v. United States ( 1994 )


Menu:
  • USCA1 Opinion









    April 26, 1994 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

    ___________________


    No. 93-2086




    MANUEL JIMENEZ-ISALE,

    Plaintiff, Appellant,

    v.

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

    Defendant, Appellee.


    __________________

    APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

    FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

    [Hon. Juan M. Perez-Gimenez, U.S. District Judge]
    ___________________



    ___________________

    Before

    Breyer, Chief Judge,
    ___________
    Selya and Boudin, Circuit Judges.
    ______________

    ___________________

    Manuel Jimenez-Isale on brief pro se.
    ____________________
    Guillermo Gil, United States Attorney, and Michael E.
    ______________ ___________
    O'Hare, Trial Attorney, on brief for appellee.
    ______



    __________________

    __________________

















    Per Curiam. We have reviewed carefully the record in
    __________

    this case, the report and recommendation of the magistrate

    judge, the opinion and order of the district court, and the

    parties' briefs. We find no merit in appellant's appeal of

    the denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief pursuant

    to 28 U.S.C. 2255.

    We make only two remarks. First, a review of the

    transcript of appellant's change of plea hearing makes clear

    that appellant "received 'real notice of the true nature of

    the charge against him,'" Henderson v. Morgan, 426 U.S. 637,
    _________ ______

    645 (1976) (quoting Smith v. O'Grady, 312 U.S. 329, 334
    _____ _______

    (1941)), and, therefore, that his plea was "voluntary in a

    constitutional sense," id. Second, inasmuch as the sentence
    __

    imposed upon appellant was within the statutory limits, the

    fact that it was imposed by a different judge from the one

    who sentenced appellant's coconspirator "is an adequate

    explanation for the disparity [in sentences] and eliminates

    any possible appearance of vindictiveness." United States v.
    _____________

    Quejada-Zurique, 708 F.2d 857, 861 (1st Cir.), cert. denied,
    _______________ ____ ______

    464 U.S. 855 (1983).

    Affirmed.
    ________











    -2-







Document Info

Docket Number: 93-2086

Filed Date: 4/28/1994

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/21/2015