Joseph Baker v. United States

Baker appeals from order of the District Court for the Western District of Washington, entered after hearing, denying his motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 . Baker protests that the hearing was had in the wrong district: in the district of confinement rather than the district of sentence.

On December 6, 1957, after jury trial had in the District Court for the Western District of Washington, Baker was sentenced to a prison term of fifteen years. He is now serving his sentence in Alcatraz Prison, San Francisco, California. On February 29, 1960, Baker filed a motion to vacate sentence under § 2255. He alleged that at the time of trial he had been mentally incompetent and unable to cooperate intelligently in his defense and that this condition was due to the fact that narcotic drugs had been administered to him by jail authorities during his incarceration at King County jail in Washington.

On June 24, 1960, the District Court for the Western District of Washington entered an order granting a hearing on Baker’s motion and specifying that the hearing be had in San Francisco in the District Court for the Northern District of California before the sentencing judge. The sentencing…

(concurring).

I concur in the above opinion. This is because I believe it is technically correct. But obviously the prisoner was fairly treated.

By way of dictum, I wish to make some general remarks. It occurs to me that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are generally applicable to these § 2255 proceedings. In fact, the district court recognized this in ordering the deposition of Dr. James T. Moriarity to be taken on written interrogatories. It occurs to me that before hearing, an assistant United States attorney could go to Alcatraz and take the petitioner’s deposition. 1 Discoveries thereunder might well form the basis for justly denying the prisoner a trip from Alcatraz to Tacoma. Surely there is meaning to the sentence in § 2255 which reads as follows:

Obviously, there will be some cases where underlying fairness will require that the prisoner be present at the hearing. And, usually when the prisoner is not present, it would be well to appoint counsel to represent him at the hearing.

We must always be alert to catch the rare case when the prisoner has been imposed upon. But there must be a way to protect the courts from the mockery that goes on in so many of these §…

287 F.2d 5 Joseph BAKER, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. No. 17100. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. February 2, 1961. Joseph Baker, in pro. per., for appellant. Charles P. Moriarty, U. S. Atty., James F. McAteer, Asst. U. S. Atty., Seattle, Wash., for appellee. Before CHAMBERS, HAMLEY and MERRILL, Circuit Judges. MERRILL, Circuit Judge. 1 Baker appeals from order of the District Court for the Western District of Washington, entered after hearing, denying his motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 . Baker protests that the hearing was had in the wrong district: in the district of confinement rather than the district of sentence. 2 On December 6, 1957, after jury trial had in the District Court for the Western District of Washington, Baker was sentenced to a prison term of fifteen years. He is now serving his sentence in Alcatraz Prison, San Francisco, California. On February 29, 1960, Baker filed a motion to vacate sentence under § 2255. He alleged that at the time of trial he had been mentally incompetent and unable to cooperate intelligently in his defense and that this condition was due to the fact that narcotic drugs had been…