Williams v. Warden, Nevada State Prison

Nevada Supreme Court

Williams v. Warden, Nevada State Prison

530 P.2d 761, 91 Nev. 16, 1975 Nev. LEXIS 532

CourtNevada Supreme Court

DecidedJanuary 16, 1975

Docket7482

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 530 P.2d 761 (Williams v. Warden, Nevada State Prison) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nevada Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Williams v. Warden, Nevada State Prison, 530 P.2d 761, 91 Nev. 16, 1975 Nev. LEXIS 532 (Neb. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

Per Curiam:

Billy Williams was convicted of the crime of robbery for which he was sentenced to life imprisonment as an habitual criminal. Williams appealed to this court on March 7, 1969. We affirmed. A petition for rehearing was subsequently denied and the Supreme Court of the United States denied his petition for a writ of certiorari. Williams v. Nevada, 396 U.S. 916 (1969).

On July 27, 1971 the United States District Court of Nevada denied Williams’ petition for a writ of habeas corpus and on *17 appeal from that denial the United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, affirmed the denial on the grounds that Williams had not exhausted his state remedies under NRS 34.360, our statutory habeas corpus provision. Williams v. Hocker, 463 F.2d 234 (9th Cir.1972). On January 12, 1973 Williams petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus to the First Judicial District Court and said petition was denied without a hearing. Williams now seeks reversal of that denial.

The United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, in considering Williams’ appeal of denial of his petition for habeas corpus, stated that Williams was entitled to a hearing on his mental competency to stand trial under Pate v. Robinson, 383 U.S. 375 (1966). The record before the court contained sufficient evidence to raise serious doubt about Williams’ competency to stand trial as indicated by his history of mental illness and the evaluation of a court-appointed psychiatrist. Williams v. Hocker, supra.

We chose to follow the suggestion of the Ninth Circuit Court for otherwise an unnecessary burden is placed on the U.S. District Court of the District of Nevada. Fine v. Warden, 90 Nev. 166, 521 P.2d 374 (1974); Rahn v. Warden, 88 Nev. 429, 498 P.2d 1344 (1972). The order of the trial court is therefore reversed and we order Williams discharged from confinement unless the State within a reasonable time elects to retry him. Should the State so elect, Williams shall be given a special hearing to determine mental competency to stand trial. Pate v. Robinson, supra; Krause v. Fogliani, 82 Nev. 459, 463, 421 P.2d 949 (1966).

Reversed.

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

OPINION

Per Curiam:

Billy Williams was convicted of the crime of robbery for which he was sentenced to life imprisonment as an habitual criminal. Williams appealed to this court on March 7, 1969. We affirmed. A petition for rehearing was subsequently denied and the Supreme Court of the United States denied his petition for a writ of certiorari. Williams v. Nevada, 396 U.S. 916 (1969).

On July 27, 1971 the United States District Court of Nevada denied Williams’ petition for a writ of habeas corpus and on *17 appeal from that denial the United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, affirmed the denial on the grounds that Williams had not exhausted his state remedies under NRS 34.360, our statutory habeas corpus provision. Williams v. Hocker, 463 F.2d 234 (9th Cir.1972). On January 12, 1973 Williams petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus to the First Judicial District Court and said petition was denied without a hearing. Williams now seeks reversal of that denial.

The United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, in considering Williams’ appeal of denial of his petition for habeas corpus, stated that Williams was entitled to a hearing on his mental competency to stand trial under Pate v. Robinson, 383 U.S. 375 (1966). The record before the court contained sufficient evidence to raise serious doubt about Williams’ competency to stand trial as indicated by his history of mental illness and the evaluation of a court-appointed psychiatrist. Williams v. Hocker, supra.

We chose to follow the suggestion of the Ninth Circuit Court for otherwise an unnecessary burden is placed on the U.S. District Court of the District of Nevada. Fine v. Warden, 90 Nev. 166, 521 P.2d 374 (1974); Rahn v. Warden, 88 Nev. 429, 498 P.2d 1344 (1972). The order of the trial court is therefore reversed and we order Williams discharged from confinement unless the State within a reasonable time elects to retry him. Should the State so elect, Williams shall be given a special hearing to determine mental competency to stand trial. Pate v. Robinson, supra; Krause v. Fogliani, 82 Nev. 459, 463, 421 P.2d 949 (1966).

Reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

530 P.2d 761, 91 Nev. 16, 1975 Nev. LEXIS 532, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-warden-nevada-state-prison-nev-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack