John Clifford James v. Lawrence E. Wilson, Warden, San Quentin Prison

Ninth Circuit

John Clifford James v. Lawrence E. Wilson, Warden, San Quentin Prison

367 F.2d 386

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedOctober 10, 1966

Docket20632_1

StatusPublished

This text of 367 F.2d 386 (John Clifford James v. Lawrence E. Wilson, Warden, San Quentin Prison) 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

John Clifford James v. Lawrence E. Wilson, Warden, San Quentin Prison, 367 F.2d 386 (9th Cir. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

In the light of Johnson v. State of New Jersey, 384 U.S. 719, 86 S.Ct. 1772, 16 L.Ed.2d 882 (1966), the district court correctly rejected appellant’s petition for habeas corpus insofar as it was based upon Escobedo v. State of Illinois, 378 U.S. 478, 84 S.Ct. 1758, 12 L.Ed.2d 977 (1964). The district court erred, however, in holding that “The remaining allegations of the petition relate to questions of evidence which do not raise a substantial federal question.” As we read the petition, appellant alleges that his conviction was based in part upon (1) oral admissions obtained from appellant by the use of threats and physical violence, and (2) the confession of an accomplice who was not produced for cross-examination. These allegations raise substantial constitutional issues. We do not consider whether appellant has exhausted his state remedies since the district court has not yet passed upon that question.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

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

PER CURIAM:

In the light of Johnson v. State of New Jersey, 384 U.S. 719, 86 S.Ct. 1772, 16 L.Ed.2d 882 (1966), the district court correctly rejected appellant’s petition for habeas corpus insofar as it was based upon Escobedo v. State of Illinois, 378 U.S. 478, 84 S.Ct. 1758, 12 L.Ed.2d 977 (1964). The district court erred, however, in holding that “The remaining allegations of the petition relate to questions of evidence which do not raise a substantial federal question.” As we read the petition, appellant alleges that his conviction was based in part upon (1) oral admissions obtained from appellant by the use of threats and physical violence, and (2) the confession of an accomplice who was not produced for cross-examination. These allegations raise substantial constitutional issues. We do not consider whether appellant has exhausted his state remedies since the district court has not yet passed upon that question.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

367 F.2d 386, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/john-clifford-james-v-lawrence-e-wilson-warden-san-quentin-prison-ca9-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack