Keith Milton Rhinehart v. B. J. Rhay, Superintendent, Washington State Penitentiary, Respondent

Ninth Circuit

Keith Milton Rhinehart v. B. J. Rhay, Superintendent, Washington State Penitentiary, Respondent

409 F.2d 208

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedMarch 27, 1969

Docket23113_1

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 409 F.2d 208 (Keith Milton Rhinehart v. B. J. Rhay, Superintendent, Washington State Penitentiary, Respondent) 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

Keith Milton Rhinehart v. B. J. Rhay, Superintendent, Washington State Penitentiary, Respondent, 409 F.2d 208 (9th Cir. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This appeal is taken from an order of the District Court denying petition for writ of habeas corpus without hearing.

Appellant claims that his right to equal protection of the laws was violated by virtue of the fact that the Washington sodomy statute under which he was convicted is being discriminatorily enforced in cases of private, consensual incidents between sexually mature adults. In our judgment factual issues are presented by this claim on which no state findings have been made and which require an evidentiary hearing. Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 6 S.Ct. 1064, 30 L.Ed. 220 (1886).

Appellant also claims that perjured testimony was knowingly used by the state. Upon this claim the state courts have found against appellant. However, the adequacy of the state findings has been subjected to serious doubt by new evidence contained in the principal witness’ latest retraction. Since an evidentiary hearing must, in any event, be held we feel that it should deal with this claim as well.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

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