Sheldon Sanders v. John Ratelle, Warden Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General of the State of California

Good Law
21 F.3d 1446·94 Daily Journal DAR 4475·1994 WL 108087·1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 6135·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2350
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 4, 199493-55134California9,272 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kaufman, J.

Part I of the opinion by Senior District Judge KAUFMAN; Part II by Judge REINHARDT.

All members of the court join in all three parts of the opinion.

delivered Part I of the opinion of the court.

REINHARDT, Circuit Judge, delivered Part II of the opinion of the court.

I

Sheldon Sanders appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Sheldon was convicted in a second trial in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, California, of second-degree murder and of illegal use of a firearm, after his first trial in that court had resulted in a hung jury. Sheldon, in the federal district court below, asserted that he had received ineffective assistance of counsel in violation of his Sixth Amendment rights. U.S. Const, amend. VI. The district court, adopting the Report and Recommendation of a U.S. Magistrate Judge, denied petitioner’s writ. Thereafter, Sheldon appealed to this Court. Because his attorneys during both trials were faced with impermissible conflicts of interest, which adversely affected their representation of Sheldon, we remand the within case to the district court with directions to issue the writ of habeas corpus sought…

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.