Lawrence Charles Young v. Hoyt C. Cupp, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary
This text of 443 F.2d 378 (Lawrence Charles Young v. Hoyt C. Cupp, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary) 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 of the district court is affirmed.
The main point asserted in this collateral attack was improper electronic surveillance. This point is lost by virtue of our Bush v. United States, 438 F.2d 641 (1971), and United States v. White, 401 U.S. 745, 91 S.Ct. 1122, 28 L.Ed.2d 453 (1971).
A point is made about not letting counsel for him in the district court be heard. Were it not for the subsequent White and Bush cases, there might be prejudice. But in view of events, there was none.
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 378, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 9483, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lawrence-charles-young-v-hoyt-c-cupp-superintendent-oregon-state-ca9-1971.