Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

460 F.2d 1068

Docket No. 72-1116.

Tahl v. O'Connor

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1972-06-16

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently March 1987

3 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on Brady v. United States · McMann v. Richardson · Parker v. North Carolina

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1972-06-16

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Charles M. Sevilla (argued), San Diego, Cal., for plaintiff-appellant.

Jay D. Coulter, Deputy Atty. Gen. (argued), Mark L. Christiansen, Deputy Atty. Gen., Doris H. Maier, Asst. Atty. Gen., Herbert L. Ashby, Chief Asst. Atty. Gen., Evelle J. Younger, Atty. Gen., San Diego, Cal., for defendant-appellee.

Before BARNES, ELY and CARTER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

¶1

This is a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, denied to petitioner, a state prisoner, after his plea of guilty to two counts of murder, one count of attempted robbery, one count of rape, and one count of grand theft auto, while represented by counsel. In re Tahl, 1 Cal.3d 122, 129, 81 Cal.Rptr. 577, 460 P.2d 449 (1969).

¶2

The petition rests upon four grounds, all treated at length by the United States District Court Judge in an excellent, painstaking decision appearing at 336 F.Supp. 576.

¶3

We affirm the District Court's judgment finding each of the petitioner's contentions of error to be without merit.

¶5

Affirmed.

/460/f2d/1068 · .json · Public domain