Unpublished Disposition, 869 F.2d 1499 (9th Cir. 1989)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 869 F.2d 1499 (9th Cir. 1989)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Leroy Bruce THOMPSON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 88-15174.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 13, 1989.* Decided Feb. 15, 1989.

Before CHAMBERS, SNEED, and NOONAN, Circuit Judges.


Appellant Leroy B. Thompson pled guilty to two counts of armed bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d). He filed this habeas corpus petition claiming that his guilty plea lacked a proper factual basis and that his indictment failed to establish federal jurisdiction because it did not charge a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(f). We find that neither contention has merit and we affirm the district court's denial of his petition.


Thompson claims that his guilty plea was invalid because the factual basis for the plea did not include any evidence that the bank he robbed was federally insured. The record does not support Thompson's claim. The indictment charging him contained an allegation of federal insurance. That indictment was read to Thompson and he stated on the record that he understood it and was guilty of the charges against him. That was sufficient to establish a factual basis. Thompson makes no claim that the statement should be discredited for any reason.

Thompson also contends that federal jurisdiction over his case did not exist because his indictment did not charge a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(f). That section defines "bank" for purposes of the bank robbery statute as, among other things, a bank that is federally insured. Thompson's claim is frivolous. His indictment alleged that he had robbed a federally insured bank. That was sufficient. Moreover, when Thompson entered a guilty plea, he admitted all of the factual allegations contained in the indictment. United States v. Matthews, 833 F.2d 161, 163 (9th Cir. 1987).

For the foregoing reasons, the district court's denial of Thompson's habeas petition is hereby AFFIRMED.


The panel finds this case appropriate for submission without oral argument pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 34(a) and 9th Cir.R. 34-4


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