Swope

Williams v. Swope

Good Law
186 F.2d 897·1951 U.S. App. LEXIS 2187
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 22, 195112538California1,232 words

Opinion

Opinion

Orr, J.

Appellant, hereinafter referred to as petitioner, filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Southern Division, hereinafter referred to as the California court, a petition for writ of habeas corpus. An order to show cause was issued, return was made by respondent and a traverse filed by petitioner. Thereafter, a writ of habeas, corpus was issued and a hearing had. Oral and documentary evidence was presented. At the conclusion of the hearing the California court denied the application and discharged the writ.

On September 6, 194S, petitioner entered a plea of guilty to a charge of violating the Dyer Act. This plea was entered in the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Tennessee, hereinafter referred to as the Tennessee court. The indictment contained two counts and sentence of five years was imposed on each count, to run consecutively. Petitioner was not represented by counsel. He now says that he did not intelligently, competently, intentionally, freely and voluntarily waive the assistance of counsel and that his plea of guilty was “perhaps induced by some federal official.” The California Court found against…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.