Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

473 F.2d 691

Docket No. 72-1568.

Mayfield v. Steed

Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided Feb. 6, 1973.

Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1973-02-06

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently November 1981

3 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

2 counsel of record

Relies on Peters v. Kiff · Ballard v. United States · 345 F. Supp. 806 - Mayfield v. Steed

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1973-02-06

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Oliver L. Adams, Rogers, Ark., on brief for appellant.

¶2John W. Murphy, Fayetteville, Ark., for appellee.

¶3Before HEANEY, BRIGHT and ROSS, Circuit Judges.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5This is an appeal from the judgment of the District Court granting a writ of habeas corpus to William Archie May-field, Jr. (Mayfield). We affirm.

¶6Mayfield was convicted of second degree murder in Arkansas state court by a jury from which all women were admittedly systematically excluded. His conviction was affirmed by the Arkansas Supreme Court. Judge Eisele, in a soundly reasoned memorandum opinion, held that the systematic exclusion of .women is impermissible under the rationale of Peters v. Kiff, 407 U.S. 493, 92 S.Ct. 2163, 33 L.Ed.2d 83 (1972), and Ballard v. United States, 329 U.S. 187, 67 S.Ct. 261, 91 L.Ed. 181 (1946).

¶7Pursuant to the provisions of Rule 8 of the rules of this Court, we affirm the judgment of the trial court on the basis of its memorandum opinion. Mayfield v. Steed, 345 F.Supp. 806 (E.D.Ark.1972)

/473/f2d/691 · .json · Public domain