Ellis v. State of Maine, Misc. No. 499.
Decision Date | 04 October 1971 |
Docket Number | Misc. No. 499. |
Citation | 448 F.2d 1325 |
Parties | Lloyd G. ELLIS, Petitioner, v. STATE OF MAINE et al., Respondents. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit |
Lloyd G. Ellis, pro se, on application for certificate of probable cause and memorandum in support thereof.
Before ALDRICH, Chief Judge, McENTEE and COFFIN, Circuit Judges.
This case is another all-too-frequent product of the erroneous view that if one alleges a loss of constitutional rights a full review of all state court convictions may be had for the asking — or, at least, that there is no harm in trying. We reiterate that we do not propose to overrule a district court's denial of a certificate of probable cause for appeal, after ruling against the petitioner, unless there is affirmatively demonstrated to us that such cause in fact exists. Bernier v. Moore, 1 Cir., 1971, 441 F.2d 395; Aubut v. Maine, 1 Cir., 1970, 431 F.2d 688, 689. Nor does it follow, however plausible it may sound, that a petitioner, by asserting that he cannot demonstrate that his rights have been infringed, must be given an attorney and a transcript so that he may discover and then show that in fact such occurred. Regarding appointment of counsel for that purpose, we adhere to our views expressed in Aubut v. Maine, ante at 689. As to the request for a transcript, it is important to note that we are not here concerned with a direct appeal from a conviction, or a state habeas which takes the place of such an appeal, where a transcript may be a matter of right without showing merit in the appeal. Gardner v. California, 1969, 393 U.S. 367, 89 S.Ct. 580, 21 L.Ed.2d 601. Appellant's petition is wholly for collateral relief. For this unusual and exceptional relief there should be a burden upon the petitioner to come into court with his case, not simply to try to make one out. This does not mean, of course, with his full case, but he must show merit, not just personal opinion.
The Supreme Court has reserved decision on whether an indigent habeas petitioner is entitled to a free transcript as of course simply in order that he may search for error. Wade v. Wilson, 1970, 396 U.S. 282, 286, 90 S.Ct. 501, 24 L. Ed.2d 470. We agree with the post-Wade opinion of the Tenth Circuit that he is not. Hines v. Baker, 10 Cir., 1970, 422 F.2d 1002, 1006. With parties in direct appeals being presently delayed in the prosecution thereof, in some cases for months, because of the inability of court reporters to keep abreast of their work, we are not about further to inconvenience other litigants, and the courts generally, in order to give a prisoner who has already had one full review an opportunity for collateral relief founded upon generalizations and hope.
Furthermore, petitioner has a more basic problem. If, as there is some suggestion in the record, petitioner's state-appointed counsel already has a copy of the transcript but refuses to give it to him, the obvious remedy is to apply in the state court for an appropriate order. Indeed, this should be the normal procedure in all cases where a state prisoner wishes a transcript. Snyder v. Nebraska, 8 Cir., 1970, 435 F.2d 679. We note, further, as the court pointed out in Chavez v. Sigler, 8 Cir., 1971, 438 F.2d 890, at 894, "the mere request for a transcript from the state court, without more, does not constitute an exhaustion of his remedies as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2254."
The district court, on full examination of the record, found that the state court had fairly found that petitioner's complaint with his concededly competent trial counsel was...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
United States v. Collom
...recollection of counsel's performance which may well lead him to conclude that a movant's claim is nonfrivolous. 5. E. g., Ellis v. Maine, 448 F.2d 1325 (CA1 1971); United States ex rel. Buford v. Henderson, 524 F.2d 147 (CA2 1975); United States v. Shoaf, 341 F.2d 832 (CA4 1964); United St......
-
In re Compact Disc Minimum Advertised Price
...to believe that the petitioner has had legal assistance, to require such signature, if such, indeed, is the fact. Ellis v. Maine, 448 F.2d 1325, 1328 (1st Cir.1971). Finally, the Lawyers have filed, through their local attorney of record, a letter dated September 22, 2006, offering informat......
-
Ricotta v. State of California
...the Ninth Circuit. In fact, there are only three reported cases in which courts have directly tackled this question. Ellis v. State of Maine, 448 F.2d 1325 (1st Cir.1971); Johnson v. Board of County Comm'rs for County of Fremont, 868 F.Supp. 1226 (D.Colo.1994); aff'd in part and disapproved......
-
Maccollom v. U.S., 73--1659
...denied, 465 F.2d 1091, (4th Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 410 U.S. 944, 93 S.Ct. 1380, 35 L.Ed.2d 611 (1973); Ellis v. State of Maine, 448 F.2d 1325, 1327 (1st Cir. 1971); Chavez v. Sigler, 438 F.2d 890 (8th Cir. 1971); Hines v. Baker, 422 F.2d 1002, 1006--1007 (10th Cir. 1970).4 What Congress ......
-
In defense of ghostwriting.
...& Co., 341 F. Supp. 699 (S.D.N.Y. 1971). (25.) Id. at 700. (26.) Id. at 702-03. (27.) Id. at 702. (28.) Id. (29.) Ellis v. Maine, 448 F.2d 1325 (1st Cir. (30.) Id. at 1328. (31.) See infra notes 130-49 and accompanying text. (32.) Laremont-Lopez v. Southeastern Tidewater Opportunity Ctr......