Jack Martin Peterson v. W. J. Estelle, Warden of the Montana State Penitentiary
This text of 446 F.2d 53 (Jack Martin Peterson v. W. J. Estelle, Warden of the Montana State Penitentiary) 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.
Opinion
The district court granted Peterson’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Estelle, the warden of the Montana State Penitentiary, appeals.
Peterson and Evans were jointly tried in the Montana court for burglary. A single counsel was appointed to represent both. There was no direct evidence connecting Peterson to the burglary. However, a prosecution witness attributed to Evans an exculpatory statement that inculpated Peterson. Neither Peterson nor Eyans took the stand. The district court found that the statement *54 created a conflict of interests between counsel’s duties to each of the codefend-ants, and issued the writ.
Whether a conflict of interests existed is a question of fact. The district court’s finding was not clearly erroneous, and it therefore must stand. Moss v. Craven, 9 Cir., 1970, 427 F.2d 139, 140; Knowles v. Gladden, 9 Cir., 1967, 378 F.2d 761, 766-767. The district court properly applied the law in concluding that the conflict of interests denied Peterson the right to effective representation of counsel. See Glasser v. United States, 1942, 315 U.S. 60, 75-76, 62 S.Ct. 457, 86 L.Ed. 680.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
446 F.2d 53, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 9687, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jack-martin-peterson-v-w-j-estelle-warden-of-the-montana-state-ca9-1971.