Rex Milton Rose v. Charles E. Morris, Secretary, Department of Social & Health Services, State of Washington

Good Law
619 F.2d 42·1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 17534
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 15, 198078-2613California733 words

Opinion

Opinion

Duniway, J.

Habeas Corpus. The district court denied the writ on the ground that Rose was not “in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court” within the meaning of 28 ÍJ.S.C. § 2254(a). We reverse.

I. The Facts.

The relevant facts are these:

In 1971, in the Superior Court of Washington for King County, Rose pled guilty to two separate charges of grand larceny. He was sentenced to three and five years of probation with certain conditions attached, under Washington’s deferred sentencing law, R.C.W. 9.95.210 and 220. In 1973, Rose was arrested for robbery and the use of narcotics, but no charges were brought against him for those allegations. Instead, on April 25, 1973, because of this arrest, a combined probation revocation and sentencing hearing was held concerning the two larceny convictions. Rose’s probation was revoked and he was sentenced in each case to the custody of the Department of Social and Health Services for a maximum of fifteen years, the sentences to run concurrently. Rose began serving these sentences and was paroled on June 25, 1975. On March 26, 1976, Rose was convicted, in Federal court, on a narcotics charge, and sentenced to a United States penitentiary. On April…

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.