TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. Victor Eduardo Bonilla-Marquez

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Victor Eduardo BONILLA-MARQUEZ, Appellant

United States v. Bonilla-Marquez, 924 F.2d 770 (8th Cir. 1991)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
January 29, 1991
Docket
No. 89-2893SI
Judges
Arnold, Gibson, Wollman
Citations
924 F.2d 7701991 WL 73681991 U.S. App. LEXIS 1218

Opinion — Arnold

ARNOLD, Circuit Judge.

Victor Eduardo Bonilla-Marquez appeals pro se the District Court’s 1

denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate his ten-year prison' sentence following his jury conviction of conspiracy to distribute cocaine, conspiracy to import cocaine, and traveling in interstate commerce to facilitate a narcotics conspiracy. The convictions of Bonil-la and three of his co-conspirators were upheld in United States v. Krevsky, 741 F.2d 1090 (8th Cir.1984).

In his section 2255 motion, Bonilla alleged that his retained trial counsel, Rex Ryland, was a co-conspirator. Bonilla alleged that his Sixth Amendment right to *771 effective assistance of counsel was abridged because Ryland refused to allow him to plea bargain for a lesser sentence out of fear that any agreement would have required Bonilla to tell the government about his drug contacts, including Ryland.

The District Court properly denied the motion after an evidentiary hearing. Bonil-la knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to assistance of counsel unhindered by a conflict of interest. See United States v. Agosto, 675 F.2d 965, 969-70 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 834 , 103 S.Ct. 77 , 74 L.Ed.2d 74 (1982);

cf. United States v. Bernloehr, 833 F.2d 749, 752 (8th Cir.1987) (defendant waived right to testify by failing to object when counsel rested without calling him to stand). Bonilla had no right to conceal the conflict from the Court, later citing it as justification for a new trial. He knew exactly what he was doing and must abide by the consequences.

Affirmed.

1

. The Honorable Harold D. Vietor, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1997: 11998: 11999: 219972026peak 1999 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. United States v. Carlton Reed179 F.3d 622 (8th Cir. 1999)
  2. No. 982015179 F.3d 622 (8th Cir. 1999)
  3. United States v. Arthur M. Blau159 F.3d 68 (2d Cir. 1998)
  4. United States v. Blau961 F. Supp. 626 (S.D.N.Y. 1997)

Most recent

  1. No. 982015179 F.3d 622 (8th Cir. 1999)
  2. United States v. Carlton Reed179 F.3d 622 (8th Cir. 1999)
  3. United States v. Arthur M. Blau159 F.3d 68 (2d Cir. 1998)
  4. United States v. Blau961 F. Supp. 626 (S.D.N.Y. 1997)

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.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
United States v. Agosto, 675 F.2d 965 (8th Cir. 1982) 99
United States v. Bernloehr, 833 F.2d 749 (8th Cir. 1987) 95
United States v. Krevsky, 741 F.2d 1090 (8th Cir. 1984) 33

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list