James E. Cunningham v. Jim Rose, Warden
This text of 476 F.2d 1285 (James E. Cunningham v. Jim Rose, Warden) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This is an appeal from the denial of a writ of habeas corpus. The appellant was convicted of rape. The jury imposed the death sentence which was commuted to a 99-year term by the Governor of Tennessee.
All the issues presented were carefully considered by District Judge Frank W. Wilson, and disposed of in a carefully *1286 prepared opinion. Judge Wilson concluded in his opinion that the admission of the confessions of each of the four defendants was error within the meaning of Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123, 88 S.Ct. 1620, 20 L.Ed.2d 476 (1968), but that such error was harmless. Schneble v. Florida, 405 U.S. 427, 92 S.Ct. 1056, 31 L.Ed.2d 340 (1972).
We are not satisfied that the use of the confessions under the circumstances of this case was in fact error within the meaning of Bruton, but conclude that if there was such error the District Judge was eminently correct in concluding that on this trial record the error was harmless.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
476 F.2d 1285, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 9898, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-e-cunningham-v-jim-rose-warden-ca6-1973.