Clarence Henderson v. Robert A. Heinze, Warden, Folsom State Prison

Good Law
349 F.2d 67·1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 4908
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 14, 196519855_1California1,346 words

Opinion

Opinion

Jertberg, J.

Petitioner, one Williams and one Auls, were convicted by a jury in the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of Yolo, of the offense denounced in § 591 of the Penal Code of the State of California.

On appeal' from the judgment of conviction to the District Court of Appeal for the State of California, Third District, the judgment of conviction was affirmed. (People v. Henderson, 214 Cal. App.2d 290 , 29 Cal.Rptr. 297 ). No petition for rehearing was filed. The petition of petitioner for a hearing by the Supreme Court of California was denied. (People v. Henderson, supra.)

Thereafter petitioner sought to file a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Northern Division, in which he sought to raise the contention that he was convicted on the basis of evidence obtained through an illegal search and seizure in violation of the provisions of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Permission to file this document was denied on the ground that the petition failed to show an exhaustion of available state remedies.

Petitioner then filed a petition for habeas corpus…

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.