Legal Opinion
Jesse Ray Maxwell v. Frank A. Eyman, Warden, Arizona State Prison
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided July 27, 1970No. 24655PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Per curiam
This appeal is one of many in which a district court has summarily denied habeas relief to an applicant on the basis of the factual conclusions appearing in a state appellate court’s opinion affirming the petitioner's conviction on a criminal charge.
Such short-cutting is impermissible. The proper procedure to follow, in instances where the application contains allegations of substance, has been frequently outlined by this court — see for example Wright v. Dickson, 336 F.2d 878 (9th Cir. 1964). And we should perhaps emphasize that a district court may not dispense with an evidentiary hearing…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Townsend v. SainSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Billy Joe Wright v. Fred R. Dickson, Warden, California State PenitentiaryCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1964
- United States Ex Rel. Jennings v. RagenSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Marvin John Piche v. B. J. Rhay, as Superintendent of the Washington State Penitentiary at Walla Walla, WashingtonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1970
3Cited by6 opinions
- Richard Sanchez v. Louis S. Nelson, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1971
- Preston R. Griff v. B. J. Rhay, Superintendent of the Washington State Penitentiary, State of WashingtonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1972
- Gilbert Valdez v. People of the State of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1971
- Collins v. BrierleyDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1971
- Hall v. CravenDistrict Court, C.D. California · 1971
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.