Donald Alan Miller v. A.A. Stagner and R.L. Pulley, Leroy Freeman v. A.A. Stagner and R.L. Pulley

Caution
757 F.2d 988·1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 31589
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 8, 198584-5980, 84-5981California11,883 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Poole, J.

Appellants Miller and Freeman were convicted of conspiracy to commit murder in violation of California Penal Code §§ 182 and 187. They appeal the district court’s dismissal of their petitions for writs of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 .

FACTS

The district court reviewed the state record from which the following facts appeared: Appellant Miller, a physician, was principal owner of a corporation which ran two medical clinics. Appellant Freeman was employed by Miller as a janitor at both clinics. In October, 1978, one of the clinics was destroyed by fire. Fire investigators determined that the fire was arson-related. White, a long time friend of Freeman, contacted Woods of the Indio police department and claimed to have information regarding the fire. At the request of police and an insurance company White met with Freeman on several occasions to elicit details concerning the fire.

When White met with Freeman on December 20, Freeman asked White if he would be willing to kill someone and White responded in the affirmative. Freeman asked White what it would be worth to him; White said $5000. After Freeman made a phone call, the two men proceeded to Miller’s office at the…

dissent Opinion

Ferguson, J.

dissenting:

The majority dismisses the violation of defendant Miller’s constitutional right to be present at the juror disqualification hearing as harmless error. In doing so the majority glosses over the facts material to Miller’s claim. In my opinion, the Constitution simply will not countenance the practice of excluding a defendant from an in camera examination of a juror’s competence after the jury has begun deliberations and has announced that it is deadlocked. Accordingly, I dissent.

After ten long weeks of trial, the jury began its deliberations. After three days of deliberations, the jury revealed to the court that it had yet to arrive at a verdict. This announcement occurred on a Thursday *997 afternoon and threatened to disturb the schedules of both the trial judge and defense counsel. Mr. Scherotter, defense counsel for petitioner Miller, informed his client that he had previously scheduled a vacation trip out of the country, leaving on Saturday.

When asked by counsel Scherotter for his consent to this vacation, Miller expressed reluctance to release his counsel at this critical juncture in the lengthy trial. On Friday, while the jury resumed its deliberations,…

Opinion

757 F.2d 988 Donald Alan MILLER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. A.A. STAGNER and R.L. Pulley, Respondents-Appellees. Leroy FREEMAN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. A.A. STAGNER and R.L. Pulley, Respondents-Appellees. Nos. 84-5980, 84-5981. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Jan. 9, 1985. Decided April 8, 1985. Donald Alan Miller, San Luis Obispo, Cal., Keith C. Monroe, Roger S. Hanson, Santa Ana, Cal., for petitioners-appellants. Donald F. Roeschke, Los Angeles, Cal., for respondents-appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Before SNEED, POOLE and FERGUSON, Circuit Judges. POOLE, Circuit Judge: 1 Appellants Miller and Freeman were convicted of conspiracy to commit murder in violation of California Penal Code Secs. 182 and 187. They appeal the district court's dismissal of their petitions for writs of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 . FACTS 2 The district court reviewed the state record from which the following facts appeared: Appellant Miller, a physician, was principal owner of a corporation which ran two medical clinics. Appellant Freeman was employed by Miller as a janitor at both clinics. In…

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.