Lloyd Lancaster, Jr. v. Carl Hocker, Warden, Nevada State Prison

In denying a petition for writ of ha-beas corpus by a state court prisoner, the district court relied upon detailed findings made by a state court of competent jurisdiction after a hearing on the merits, together with excerpts from a transcript of the state court proceedings contained in petitioner’s briefs, and a transcript of the arraignment proceedings at the trial. The entire transcript of the state court habeas corpus proceedings, however, was not produced by either party .

On the basis of Selz v. State of California, 9 Cir. 1970, 423 F.2d 702 , and cases therein cited, we feel compelled to remand for an independent review of the entire transcript of the state evidentiary hearing.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

. In denying the petition for a rehearing the district court said that, “The denial of the writ was based on the failure of Petitioner to allege with particularity in what manner the state post-conviction hearing and findings consequent thereto were inadequate” and that it was “apparent that petitioner has a transcript of the state hearing but has failed to produce it as required by 28 U.S.O. § 2254(e) even after being given an opportunity to do so.”…