William Curtis Hutchinson v. Walter S. Craven, Warden

Good Law
415 F.2d 278·1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 11101
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 14, 196923224California842 words

Opinion

Opinion

William Curtis Hutchinson, in California penal custody under a 1964 conviction for first-degree murder, applied to the district court for a writ of habeas corpus. The sole ground for relief urged in his application was that his plea of guilty was not voluntary but was coerced. Hutchinson has exhausted his state court remedies with respect to this issue, having raised it on his state appeal and in five state habeas applications.

The district court denied the application on the grounds that: (a) in a prior district court habeas proceeding, involving the same issue, another district court judge had, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d), properly presumed to be correct the unequivocal determination of the California Court of Appeal, that Hutchinson’s plea of guilty had been voluntarily entered with full knowledge of his legal rights, and (b) Hutchinson had presented no new factual or other ground not adjudicated in the earlier federal habeas proceeding, citing 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (b). This appeal followed.

We hold that the application should not have been denied on the grounds relied upon by the district court.

The court in the prior federal habeas proceeding was not entitled, under…

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.