Daniels v. Nelson

Decision Date15 December 1969
Docket NumberNo. 24232.,24232.
Citation415 F.2d 323
PartiesDale Leroy DANIELS, Appellant, v. Louis S. NELSON, Warden, etc., Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit

Dale Leroy Daniels, in pro. per.

Thomas C. Lynch, Atty. Gen., San Francisco, Cal., for appellee.

Before HAMLEY, ELY and CARTER, Circuit Judges.

Certiorari Denied December 15, 1969. See 90 S.Ct. 494.

PER CURIAM:

The appellant, a state prisoner, petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus. The district court denied the writ. We affirm.

At the time the petition was filed, and at the time it was denied in the district court, appellant's appeal from his conviction in the state court was still pending in the Court of Appeal for the State of California. His complaint in the district court below concerned failure of the court of appeal to augment the record on appeal. With the appeal still pending, petitioner may apply for augmentation with appropriate specificity; if the court of appeal denies his request, he may urge this denial as error on the appeal and he may petition the State Supreme Court for a hearing if his argument is rejected. After his conviction is affirmed petitioner still has his remedy by petition for habeas corpus in the state courts.

It is apparent that his habeas petition, filed while his state appeal was pending, is premature and was properly denied by the district court below, 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b) and (c); Martinez v. Craven, (9 Cir. 1968), 397 F.2d 256; Davidson v. Klinger et al., 411 F.2d 746 (9 Cir. May 27, 1969).

Without prejudice to the appellant's right to raise a constitutional question in the federal court at the proper time, the order denying the application for a writ of habeas corpus is

Affirmed.

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 cases
  • Morgan v. Thomas
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Mississippi
    • 3 november 1970
    ...167 So.2d 657 (1964); Ballew v. Case, 232 Miss. 183, 98 So.2d 451 (1957). 22 Wilson v. Beto, 415 F.2d 774 (C.A.5, 1969); Daniels v. Nelson, 415 F.2d 323 (C.A.9, 1969), reh. den.; cert. den., 396 U.S. 994, 90 S.Ct. 494, 24 L.Ed.2d 459; United States ex rel. Bagley v. LaVallee, 332 F.2d 890 (......
  • Coe v. Thurman
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • 5 november 1990
    ...ground, thereby mooting the federal question." Id. (citing Davidson v. Klinger, 411 F.2d 746, 747 (9th Cir.1969)); see also Daniels v. Nelson, 415 F.2d 323 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 994, 90 S.Ct. 494, 24 L.Ed.2d 459 Our inquiry, however, is not terminated. As the habeas statute its......
  • Jones v. Hill
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of California
    • 30 juli 2020
    ...where prisoner had unsuccessfully petitioned state courts for free transcript for appeal, and appeal still pending); Daniels v. Nelson, 415 F.2d 323 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 994 (1969) (no exhaustion where state appeal pending). Thus, [petitioner's] claim is premature, and must be......
  • Johnson v. Uttecht
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Washington
    • 2 oktober 2019
    ...result in the reversal of the petitioner's conviction on some other ground, thereby mooting the federal question."); Daniels v. Nelson, 415 F.2d 323, 323 (9th Cir. 1969) ("habeas petition, filed while [petitioner's] state appeal was pending, is premature"). Petitioner filed three documents ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT