David Martinez, Jr. v. Lawrence E. Wilson, Warden of San Quentin State Prison
357 F.2d 173
Opinion
The questions presented by appellant in this habeas corpus proceeding present no federal question, or are foreclosed by the plea of guilty, or were not raised in the district court, or are plainly without merit. Some of these questions are subject to two or more of these defects.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
David Martinez, Jr. v. Lawrence E. Wilson, Warden of San Quentin State Prison, 357 F.2d 173 (9th Cir. 1966).
357 F.2d 173 (David Martinez, Jr. v. Lawrence E. Wilson, Warden of San Quentin State Prison) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Hernandez v. Craven
350 F. Supp. 929 (C.D. California, 1972)
Hicks v. Kenton
331 F. Supp. 693 (C.D. California, 1971)
Rawlins v. Craven
329 F. Supp. 40 (C.D. California, 1971)
Arthur v. Sheriff
325 F. Supp. 1320 (C.D. California, 1971)
Hall v. Craven
325 F. Supp. 516 (C.D. California, 1971)
Martini v. Sheriff
325 F. Supp. 649 (C.D. California, 1971)
Pace v. Nelson
321 F. Supp. 622 (C.D. California, 1970)
Perez v. Craven
314 F. Supp. 867 (C.D. California, 1970)
Bonner v. Schneckloth
309 F. Supp. 442 (C.D. California, 1970)
Cline v. Craven
310 F. Supp. 997 (C.D. California, 1969)
Cancino v. Craven
305 F. Supp. 539 (C.D. California, 1969)
Bernard E. Leclair v. United States
357 F.2d 173 (Tenth Circuit, 1966)