Arthur N. Aiken v. James Blodgett, Superintendent

Good Law
90 Daily Journal DAR 14052·921 F.2d 214·1990 WL 198795·1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 21415·90 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9027
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 12, 199090-35290California1,471 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wright, J.

For 25 years this case has been winding its way through state and federal courts. After dismissal of an earlier habeas corpus petition for failure to exhaust in 1988, the petitioner has returned for an adjudication on the merits. We reject his claim that new evidence shows that his confession was involuntary. We find no merit in his other constitutional claims and affirm the district court’s denial of the petition.

I

In 1965, three Seattle area service stations were robbed and the attendants murdered. The day after the third murder, Arthur N. Aiken was arrested and interrogated by two police officers. He allegedly asked for an attorney several times during the interrogation, which was tape recorded. The officers testified that they did not hear such requests.

Initially, Aiken denied any knowledge of the crimes but, after being confronted with his co-defendant’s statements, he confessed. He was convicted in state court of first degree murder and now is serving three consecutive life sentences.

Aiken initiated a habeas corpus petition in 1985, claiming that new evidence would prove that the officers intentionally ignored his requests for counsel. He maintains that Mr. Shipp, a…

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.