John Edward Daugherty v. Walter E. Craven, Warden

Ninth Circuit

John Edward Daugherty v. Walter E. Craven, Warden

422 F.2d 6

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedApril 27, 1970

Docket23373

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 422 F.2d 6 (John Edward Daugherty v. Walter E. Craven, 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.

Bluebook

John Edward Daugherty v. Walter E. Craven, Warden, 422 F.2d 6 (9th Cir. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The dismissal of the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is reversed and the case remanded. The district court must determine whether the ex parte orders revoking probation violated the Sixth Amendment. See Mempa v. Rhay, 389 U.S. 128, 88 S.Ct. 254, 19 L.Ed.2d 336 (1967), and McConnell v. Rhay, 393 U.S. 2, 89 S.Ct. 32, 21 L.Ed.2d 2 (1968).

From the information before us, it appears that the issue has not been presented to, or considered by, the California courts. The district court may hold the petition in abeyance for a reasonable time in order to afford the California courts the first opportunity to consider the issue. Compare Ney v. Oberhauser, 419 F.2d 828 (9th Cir. 1969).

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

PER CURIAM:

The dismissal of the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is reversed and the case remanded. The district court must determine whether the ex parte orders revoking probation violated the Sixth Amendment. See Mempa v. Rhay, 389 U.S. 128, 88 S.Ct. 254, 19 L.Ed.2d 336 (1967), and McConnell v. Rhay, 393 U.S. 2, 89 S.Ct. 32, 21 L.Ed.2d 2 (1968).

From the information before us, it appears that the issue has not been presented to, or considered by, the California courts. The district court may hold the petition in abeyance for a reasonable time in order to afford the California courts the first opportunity to consider the issue. Compare Ney v. Oberhauser, 419 F.2d 828 (9th Cir. 1969).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

422 F.2d 6, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/john-edward-daugherty-v-walter-e-craven-warden-ca9-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack