James Edward Gibson v. Charles S. Dell, Acting Warden
This text of 443 F.2d 75 (James Edward Gibson v. Charles S. Dell, Acting Warden) 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 order denying issuance of a writ of habeas corpus is affirmed. Here no issue of facts was presented and no hearing was required.
Appellant is wrong when he asserts that the information under which he pleaded guilty did not state a crime.
His assertion of equal protection denial because a judge or jury can fix a crime as a felony or a misdemeanor depending on the sentence is without merit. See In Re Gutierrez, 82 Ariz. 21, 307 P.2d 914, cert. denied 355 U.S. 17, 78 S.Ct. 79, 2 L.Ed.2d 23.
Olsen v. Delmore, 1956, 48 Wash.2d 545, 295 P.2d 324, and State v. Pirkey, 1955, 203 Or. 697, 281 P.2d 698, cited by appellant are distinguishable for the reasons ably stated by the district judge in his order denying the writ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
443 F.2d 75, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 10531, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-edward-gibson-v-charles-s-dell-acting-warden-ca9-1971.