Snook

Opinion by Judge T.G. NELSON; Special Concurrence by Judge WRIGHT.

OVERVIEW

Tana Wood, Superintendent, Washington State Penitentiary (“State”), appeals the district court’s partial grant of habeas corpus relief to Washington State prisoner Donald M. Snook (“Snook”), who challenges his 1977 murder conviction and life sentence.

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2243, and we affirm.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

In 1975, while incarcerated for taking a motor vehicle without permission, Snook was charged with first-degree murder of a fellow inmate. A jury convicted Snook, and he was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum sentence of twenty years.

While serving his sentence, in January 1977, Snook allegedly killed another inmate. In February 1977, Snook was charged with first-degree aggravated murder under Washington’s 1975 mandatory death penalty statute, RCW 9A.32.046.

In June 1977, prior to Snook’s second murder trial, the Governor of Washington signed into law Substituted House Bill No. 615, effective immediately, which changed the procedures for imposition of the death penalty for aggravated murder under the 1975 statute. This new law did not…

concurring specially:

I concur in the majority’s disposition of each issue. I write separately, however, to emphasize that my concurrence on the waiver of counsel issue is based upon the district court’s finding during consideration of Snook’s petition for habeas corpus that no court or attorney warned him about the dan *614 gers of self-representation. Such a warning was required under Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 835 , 95 S.Ct. 2525, 2541 , 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975). Accordingly, it is my view we are not requiring an in-court colloquy and are not relying on a new rule of law.