Woollomes

Woollomes v. Heinze, Warden of California State Prison at Folsom

Good Law
198 F.2d 577
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 16, 195213224California1,458 words

Opinion

Opinion

Orr, J.

Woollomes appeals from an order of the district court dismissing his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The petition charges the deliberate suppression of cer tain evidence by the prosecution at the time of his trial for murder in the state courts.

The dismissal below was based upon the asserted failure of Woollomes to exhaust his state remedies as required by 28 U.S. C.A. § 2254. While we do not agree that dismissal on this ground was proper we find other reasons amply sufficient to sustain the judgment.

On February 23, 1938 two men held up the Burp Hollow Cafe in Los Angeles and killed the proprietor. Woollomes and a man named Lariscy were convicted of the robbery and murder, and the conviction was upheld by the California Supreme Court. People v. Lariscy, 1939, 14 Cal.2d 30 , 92 P.2d 638 . Woollomes did not petition the California Supreme Court for a writ of habeas corpus until 1950. The appellee contends that the petitioner presented no reason for this delay and that such neglect constituted a failure to comply with a State of California procedural requirement that a belated attack upon a criminal conviction must set forth some explanation for the delay and, hence, the…

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.