George Maiden, Jr. v. William Bunnell John Van De Kamp

Good Law
35 F.3d 477·94 Daily Journal DAR 13158·1994 WL 506998·1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 25657·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7167
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 19, 199493-15861California3,241 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fletcher, J.

George Maiden appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Maiden was convicted in state court of first degree murder and attempted robbery. His defense attorney at trial formerly worked as a prosecutor and had successfully brought a felony burglary prosecution against Maiden three years earlier. Maiden argues that this was an impermissible conflict of interest which violated his Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel. He also argues that his Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial was violated by certain statements made by the trial judge in the presence of the jury.

We affirm.

I

In May, 1974, a clerk at the Metropole Liquor Store was fatally shot during an attempted robbery. The next day a woman called the police and stated that her boyfriend, George Maiden, had told her he shot and killed a person during a failed attempt to rob a liquor store. Maiden was arrested the following day.

At a photographic lineup, the two eyewitnesses to the murder failed to make a positive identification. At a subsequent live lineup, one witness singled out both Maiden and another man with about equal certainty, and the second picked Maiden but,…

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.