William Archie Mayfield, Jr. v. Bill Steed, Acting Commissioner of the Department of Corrections

Eighth Circuit

William Archie Mayfield, Jr. v. Bill Steed, Acting Commissioner of the Department of Corrections

473 F.2d 691, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 11824

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 6, 1973

Docket72-1568

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 473 F.2d 691 (William Archie Mayfield, Jr. v. Bill Steed, Acting Commissioner of the Department of Corrections) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

William Archie Mayfield, Jr. v. Bill Steed, Acting Commissioner of the Department of Corrections, 473 F.2d 691, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 11824 (8th Cir. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from the judgment of the District Court granting a writ of habeas corpus to William Archie May-field, Jr. (Mayfield). We affirm.

Mayfield was convicted of second degree murder in Arkansas state court by a jury from which all women were admittedly systematically excluded. His conviction was affirmed by the Arkansas Supreme Court. Judge Eisele, in a soundly reasoned memorandum opinion, held that the systematic exclusion of .women is impermissible under the rationale of Peters v. Kiff, 407 U.S. 493, 92 S.Ct. 2163, 33 L.Ed.2d 83 (1972), and Ballard v. United States, 329 U.S. 187, 67 S.Ct. 261, 91 L.Ed. 181 (1946).

Pursuant to the provisions of Rule 8 of the rules of this Court, we affirm the judgment of the trial court on the basis of its memorandum opinion. Mayfield v. Steed, 345 F.Supp. 806 (E.D.Ark.1972)

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from the judgment of the District Court granting a writ of habeas corpus to William Archie May-field, Jr. (Mayfield). We affirm.

Mayfield was convicted of second degree murder in Arkansas state court by a jury from which all women were admittedly systematically excluded. His conviction was affirmed by the Arkansas Supreme Court. Judge Eisele, in a soundly reasoned memorandum opinion, held that the systematic exclusion of .women is impermissible under the rationale of Peters v. Kiff, 407 U.S. 493, 92 S.Ct. 2163, 33 L.Ed.2d 83 (1972), and Ballard v. United States, 329 U.S. 187, 67 S.Ct. 261, 91 L.Ed. 181 (1946).

Pursuant to the provisions of Rule 8 of the rules of this Court, we affirm the judgment of the trial court on the basis of its memorandum opinion. Mayfield v. Steed, 345 F.Supp. 806 (E.D.Ark.1972)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

473 F.2d 691, 1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 11824, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/william-archie-mayfield-jr-v-bill-steed-acting-commissioner-of-the-ca8-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack