David August Dhaemers v. State of Minnesota

Eighth Circuit

David August Dhaemers v. State of Minnesota

456 F.2d 1291, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 10739

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedMarch 15, 1972

Docket71-1432

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 456 F.2d 1291 (David August Dhaemers v. State of Minnesota) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

David August Dhaemers v. State of Minnesota, 456 F.2d 1291, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 10739 (8th Cir. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appeal was taken by petitioner from the federal district court’s denial of a writ of habeas corpus. The district court denied a writ of habeas corpus to David August Dhaemers, a state prisoner, for the reasons set out in the decisions of the Minnesota Supreme Court. Dhaemers v. State, 286 Minn. 250, 175 N.W.2d 457 (1970) (post-conviction) and State v. Dhaemers, 276 Minn. 332, 150 N.W.2d 61 (1967). This appeal followed.

We have reviewed the entire record and case law. Petitioner’s claim that his amnesia on the day of the offense is proof of his incompetency to provide assistance to his trial counsel is not dispositive of the issue. See United States v. Sullivan, 406 F.2d 180 (2 Cir. 1969). We agree that the Supreme Court *1292 of the State of Minnesota has fully and adequately considered petitioner’s federal claims. No further evidentiary hearing is necessary.

Judgment affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appeal was taken by petitioner from the federal district court’s denial of a writ of habeas corpus. The district court denied a writ of habeas corpus to David August Dhaemers, a state prisoner, for the reasons set out in the decisions of the Minnesota Supreme Court. Dhaemers v. State, 286 Minn. 250, 175 N.W.2d 457 (1970) (post-conviction) and State v. Dhaemers, 276 Minn. 332, 150 N.W.2d 61 (1967). This appeal followed.

We have reviewed the entire record and case law. Petitioner’s claim that his amnesia on the day of the offense is proof of his incompetency to provide assistance to his trial counsel is not dispositive of the issue. See United States v. Sullivan, 406 F.2d 180 (2 Cir. 1969). We agree that the Supreme Court *1292 of the State of Minnesota has fully and adequately considered petitioner’s federal claims. No further evidentiary hearing is necessary.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

456 F.2d 1291, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 10739, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/david-august-dhaemers-v-state-of-minnesota-ca8-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack