Byrle L. Dillenburg v. A. Ludlow Kramer, Secretary of State of the State of Washington, and Carl G. Erlandson, City Clerk of the City of Seattle

This appeal presents the question: Does appellant’s complaint challenging the constitutionality of Article VI, § 3, of the Constitution of the State of Washington 1 and of Washington’s Revised Code § 29.01.080, 2 which deny voting rights to unpardoned persons convicted of crimes punishable by imprisonment in the state penitentiary, raise a substantial federal question requiring the convening of a three-judge court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2281 ? 3

Appellant was convicted for robbery and was sentenced to state prison in Washington in 1966. He was paroled in May 1970. Since his release from prison, he has been employed by the Public Defender’s Office in Seattle. The Governor declined his request for restoration of his civil rights. His attempt to register to vote in September 1970 was thwarted solely because he is disenfranchised under the challenged Washington laws.

He filed this action for declaratory and injunctive relief alleging that the provisions of Washington law disqualifying him from voting violated the First, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and Article 1, § 9, of the Constitution. The district court rejected the application and…

(dissenting) :

I dissent.

I would affirm the order of the District Court which denied Dillenburg’s application for the convening of a three-judge court and dismissed his complaint.

Dillenburg was convicted of the felony of robbery in the King County Court on November 28, 1966 and was sentenced to 20 years in the state penitentiary, from which he was released on parole on May 4, 1970. He was not permitted to register to vote in Seattle because of his felony conviction and the fact that his civil rights had not been restored. Dillen-burg asserts that the Constitution and implementing statutes of the State of Washington which exclude him from the elective franchise as a person convicted of an infamous crime are unconstitutional. I agree with District Judge McGovern that no substantial constitutional question is presented.

From time immemorial felons have suffered such disabilities as the loss of voting rights, permanently or for a term of years, subject to restoration of rights or pardon. The state has a proper interest in imposing such disabilities on felons and its decision to do so has a rational basis, as elaborated by Judge Friendly in Green v. Board of Elections of the City…

469 F.2d 1222 Byrle L. DILLENBURG, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. A. Ludlow KRAMER, Secretary of State of the State of Washington, and Carl G. Erlandson, City Clerk of the City of Seattle, Defendants-Appellees. No. 71-2647. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Nov. 16, 1972. Peter Greenfield (argued), Robert T. Czeisler, M. John Bundy, Roger M. Leed, Seattle, Wash., for plaintiff-appellant. Wayne L. Williams, Asst. Atty. Gen. (argued), Slade Gorton, Atty. Gen., Olympia, Wash., for defendants-appellees. Before LUMBARD, * HUFSTEDLER, and CHOY, Circuit Judges. HUFSTEDLER, Circuit Judge: 1 This appeal presents the question: Does appellant's complaint challenging the constitutionality of Article VI, Sec. 3, of the Constitution of the State of Washington 1 and of Washington's Revised Code Sec. 29.01.080, 2 which deny voting rights to unpardoned persons convicted of crimes punishable by imprisonment in the state penitentiary, raise a substantial federal question requiring the convening of a three-judge court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2281 ? 3 2 Appellant was convicted for robbery and was sentenced to state prison in Washington in 1966. He was paroled in May 1970. Since his release…