Eules Ezekiel Stanley v. Peter J. Pitchess, Etc.

This is an appeal from a denial of a writ of habeas corpus in the district court by a state prisoner who claimed he was denied the assistance of counsel in a state court trial. Appellant had the assistance of court appointed counsel at his arraignment, plea, during the selection of the jury and until after the prosecution had rested their ease. At this point the defendant asked that he be allowed to represent himself, and waive counsel. This he had a constitutional right to do, and his request was granted. He now claims he did not waive counsel, “knowingly or otherwise,” and that he had ineffective counsel. The record of the state proceedings indicates other wise . We affirm the denial of the writ for the reasons expressed by the district court judge in his “Memorandum and Order” (C.T. 68-71), which we incorporate herein as follows:

The trial continued on January 23rd. After the prosecution had rested its case on January 23, petitioner requested that his court-appointed attorney be relieved and that he be permitted to proceed in propria persona. The reporter’s transcript of January 23, 1964 indicates that petitioner stated that he did not feel he was properly represented by his…