Preston R. Griff v. B. J. Rhay, Superintendent of the Washington State Penitentiary, State of Washington

Griff was convicted of grand larceny by a Pierce County, Washington, jury. Prior to trial, his counsel moved to suppress testimony of eye-witnesses because it allegedly was based on an unconstitutional photo session, which was held during the investigatory stage of the ease. The trial judge denied the motion.

On appeal, the Washington Supreme Court affirmed Griff’s conviction, finding that any error in the case was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, under Chapman v. California, 886 U.S. 18 , 87 S.Ct. 824 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967). State v. Griff, 75 Wash.2d 267 , 450 P.2d 486 (1969). Griff then raised the same issue in the present petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The District Court denied the writ for the same reason, based solely on the reported opinion of the Washington Supreme Court. The trial transcript was not before the District Court.

Reliance on the reported opinion of the Washington Supreme Court was improper. See, e. g., Tannehill v. Fitzharris, 451 F.2d 1322 (9th Cir. 1971); Sanchez v. Nelson, 446 F.2d 849 (9th Cir. 1971); Valdez v. California, 439 F.2d 1405 (9th Cir. 1971); Maxwell v. Eyman, 429 F.2d 502 (9th Cir. 1970). The District Court must make its…