Rafael Narberto Pardo Fernandez v. United States
Rafael Narberto Pardo FERNANDEZ, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee
Opinion
PER CURIAM:
The only issue requiring discussion in this appeal from denial of a § 2255 motion is whether under Rule 11 Fed.R.Crim.P. a defendant entering a guilty plea must be advised that he is ineligible for parole. In Trujillo v. United States, 5 Cir., 377 F.2d 266 , cert. denied, 389 U.S. 899 , 88 S.Ct, 224 , 19 L.Ed.2d 221 (1967), this court held there was no such requirement, and that decision can be modified only by an en banc decision of the court. Sua sponte we took en banc United States v. Farias, 459 F.2d 738 (CA5, 1972), to determine whether Trujillo should any longer be followed, and we withheld decision in this case to await the result in Farias .
The court en banc has, however, pretermitted decision of that issue, United States v. Farias, 488 F.2d 852 (CA5, 1974), with the result that Trujillo and now the panel opinion in Farias remain viable. We pretermit discussion of the differing views of the members of this panel, since in any event we are bound by Trujillo and now by the panel opinion in Farias, unless and until the full court decides otherwise.
The other two points raised by appellant are totally without merit.
Affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(trial court not required to divulge parole eligibility information before accepting plea)
Cited by 5 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.