Unpublished Disposition, 860 F.2d 1089 (9th Cir. 1989)
Annotate this CaseRandy Allen MYERS, Petitioner-Appellant,v.UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 87-2236.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 14, 1988.* Decided Sept. 29, 1988.As Amended on Denial of Rehearing Jan. 4, 1989.
Before BOOCHEVER, JOHN M. WISDOM** and DAVID R. THOMPSON, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM***
Randy Allen Myers asks this court to reverse the decision by the district court to deny his petition for a writ of coram nobis without reviewing it on the merits. In the alternative, he asks this court to grant the petition. We reject his appeal and affirm the district court.
Myers has presented two prior motions raising the same legal claim, both of which were denied after consideration on the merits. He argues that new factual support for these allegations requires the district court to reconsider them on their merits. A court need not reconsider a petition for a writ of coram nobis on the merits if the petition advances the same legal claim as did a previous petition, even if the later petition is based on new factual allegations. Sanders v. United States, 373 U.S. at 1, 16, 10 L. Ed. 2d 148, 161 (1962). The two prior motions and this petition, although based on different factual allegations, raise the same legal claim that Myer's guilty plea was not made voluntarily.
It is appropriate to point out that if we were to reconsider Myer's petition on the merits, we would deny it. He contends that he would not have pleaded guilty to second degree murder if he had know that "malice aforethought" was one element of the offense. The district court found that he was adequately informed. Because the record indicates that the trial judge established that Myers understood the implications of his plea, we affirm. See Williams v. Raines, 783 F.2d 774, 775 (9th Cir. 1986).1 The clarity of the record on this point also establishes that an evidentiary hearing was not necessary. Id.
The district court's denial of the petition is therefore AFFIRMED.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for disposition without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4
Honorable John Minor Wisdom, Senior United States Circuit Judge for the Fifth Circuit, sitting by designation
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3
Myers relies on Henderson v. Morgan, where the Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's decision to vacate a plea of guilty to a charge of second degree murder on the ground that the defendant had not been informed that "actual malice" was an element of the offense. 426 U.S. 637, 49 L. Ed. 2d 108 (1976). In Henderson, the Supreme Court relied heavily on the district court's finding that the defendant was not informed. The district court here found that Myers was adequately informed
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
