Charles C. Carter v. Frank A. Eyman, Warden, Arizona State Prison

424 F.2d 279, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 9968
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided April 6, 1970·No. 23020·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

We agree with the reasons stated by the district court in denying the petition herein of Charles C. Carter for a writ of habeas corpus, as set forth in Carter v. Eyman, 281 F.Supp. 776 (D.Ariz.1968). However, the dictum in that opinion, at page 778, to the effect that if Carter (originally tried prior to the decisions in Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U.S. 478, 84 S.Ct. 1758, 12 L.Ed.2d 977, and Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694) were now to be retried, the principles announced in Escobedo and Miranda would apply, is incorrect in view of the recent decision of the Supreme Court in Jenkins v. Delaware, 395 U.S. 213, 89 S.Ct. 1677, 23 L.Ed.2d 253.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Charles C. Carter v. Frank A. Eyman, Warden, Arizona State Prison, 424 F.2d 279, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 9968 (9th Cir. 1970).

424 F.2d 279 (Charles C. Carter v. Frank A. Eyman, Warden, Arizona State Prison) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Escobedo v. Illinois
378 U.S. 478 (Supreme Court, 1964)
Miranda v. Arizona
384 U.S. 436 (Supreme Court, 1966)
Jenkins v. Delaware
395 U.S. 213 (Supreme Court, 1969)
Carter v. Eyman
281 F. Supp. 776 (D. Arizona, 1968)