GARNER v. YEAGER, WARDEN, Et Al.

389 U.S. 86, 88 S. Ct. 200, 19 L. Ed. 2d 253, 1967 U.S. LEXIS 345
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedNovember 6, 1967
Docket704
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 389 U.S. 86 (GARNER v. YEAGER, WARDEN, Et Al.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
GARNER v. YEAGER, WARDEN, Et Al., 389 U.S. 86, 88 S. Ct. 200, 19 L. Ed. 2d 253, 1967 U.S. LEXIS 345 (1967).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Certiorari was granted in this case on October 9, 1967. The judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is vacated and the case is remanded to the District Court of New Jersey for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Petitioner sought federal habeas corpus on the ground, among others, that prior to his state trial, the assistant prosecutor who handled the prosecution concealed the existence of a promise or agreement to recommend a specific sentence or leniency for an accomplice who testified as a State’s witness against petitioner. The District Court rejected the claim without a hearing and upon its examination of the trial record, the record upon a motion for new trial, and the decision of the Supreme Court of New Jersey at 43 N. J. 209, 203 A. 2d 177. However, subsequent to the entry of the judgment of the Court of Appeals on April 7, 1967, the Supreme Court of New Jersey, on July 5, 1967, in a state post-conviction pro *87 ceeding brought by petitioner’s co-defendant Taylor, under N. J. Rev. R. 3:10A, granted Taylor a new trial after a trial court hearing on similar allegations. State v. Taylor, 49 N. J. 440, 231 A. 2d 212. In that circumstance the judgment of the Court of Appeals is vacated and the case is remanded to the District Court for reconsideration of petitioner's claim in light of the action of the Supreme Court of New Jersey in State v. Taylor. The District Court’s reconsideration may include whether petitioner should be required first to exhaust any remedy which may be available in the state courts.

It is so ordered.

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

Related

Mahnke v. Northwest Publications, Inc.
160 N.W.2d 1 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1968)
Commonwealth ex rel. Berkery v. Myers
239 A.2d 805 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1968)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
389 U.S. 86, 88 S. Ct. 200, 19 L. Ed. 2d 253, 1967 U.S. LEXIS 345, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garner-v-yeager-warden-et-al-scotus-1967.