Henry Simpson v. Harley O. Teets, Warden, California State Prison at San Quentin

239 F.2d 890
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedDecember 6, 1956
Docket14895_1
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 239 F.2d 890 (Henry Simpson v. Harley O. Teets, Warden, California State Prison at San Quentin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Henry Simpson v. Harley O. Teets, Warden, California State Prison at San Quentin, 239 F.2d 890 (9th Cir. 1956).

Opinions

HEALY, Circuit Judge.

Appellant was charged in a California Superior Court of causing his son, Clarence, to murder appellant’s wife, Clarence’s mother. On a trial before a jury a verdict of guilty of murder in the first degree was returned against him. The jury determined also that appellant was not insane. A sentence of death was imposed against him. On the mandatory appeal to the state Supreme Court the conviction was affirmed. People v. Simpson, 43 Cal.2d 553, 275 P.2d 31. Habeas corpus proceedings were then brought in the state Supreme Court, the petition for the writ being predicated in major part on a claim that appellant’s stepson, Donald Dodge, gaye knowingly perjured testimony on the trial. This petition the California Supreme Court denied. Certiorari was applied for to the United States Supreme Court and was denied. Simpson v. Teets, 349 U.S. 960, 75 S.Ct. 890, 99 L.Ed. 1283.

The present appeal is from a denial of the petition for the writ presented to the court below, District Judge Roche presiding. The petition there lodged and denied is identical in its averments with that presented to the Supreme Court of California and likewise with that accompanying the petition for certiorari which was denied by the United States Supreme Court.

The prime contention of Simpson’s counsel appears to be that because the California Supreme Court denied without opinion his petition for the writ, that therefore it did not consider the petition. The same contention seems to be put forward with respect to the denial of cer-tiorari by the United States Supreme Court. We are unable to see any merit in this contention, or in the appeal.

The District Court’s denial of the writ is accordingly affirmed.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
239 F.2d 890, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/henry-simpson-v-harley-o-teets-warden-california-state-prison-at-san-ca9-1956.