Dusseldorf

Dusseldorf, a prisoner convicted of murder by the California courts and sentenced to death, appeals from a judgment dismissing his application for a writ of habeas corpus. His application is supplemented by our taking judicial notice of certain facts stated in the transcript of the case on which is based the decision on his appeal to the California Supreme Court from his conviction. This transcript is brought to our attention by Dusseldorf and sought to be so treated.

These facts are of occurrences at the trial in the court’s chambers in part after the jury panel was assembled and waiting drawing of names by the clerk and in part after the beginning of the drawing. They are:

Dusseldorf’s attorney, who freely offered his services in an able brief, contends that the State of California violated the Fourteenth Amendment in the failure of its officer, the California Superior Court judge, to inquire into the circumstances of the relationship of Dusseldorf to his attorney to determine his claim to the right to other counsel and relies upon Glasser v. United States, 315 u;s. 60, 70, 62 S.Ct. 457 , 86 L.Ed. 680 .

It further appears that on the automatic appeal from the death sentence…