Hayes v. Holman, 22012.

Decision Date14 June 1965
Docket NumberNo. 22012.,22012.
Citation346 F.2d 991
PartiesBervin HAYES, Appellant, v. William C. HOLMAN, Warden, Kilby Prison, Alabama, Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit

Bervin Hayes, pro se.

David W. Clark, Asst. Atty. Gen., Montgomery, Ala., for appellee.

Before TUTTLE, Chief Judge, and EDGERTON* and SMITH,** Circuit Judges.

TUTTLE, Chief Judge:

This is an appeal from an order denying a petition for writ of habeas corpus without a hearing. On September 25, 1963, petitioner was tried and convicted for "a crime against nature." The following day he was sentenced to eight years imprisonment. He was not represented by counsel at arraignment, trial, sentencing, or in any of his attempts to obtain post-conviction relief in the State Courts of Alabama. The denial of relief by the U. S. District Court was based on a determination that appellant failed to exhaust state remedies. Subsequently, the federal trial court also denied a petition for a certificate of probable cause on the ground that the taking of an appeal was not made in good faith in that petitioner had deliberately bypassed available appellate courts of the State of Alabama, citing Fay v. Noia, 372 U.S. 391, 438, 83 S.Ct. 822, 9 L.Ed.2d 837.

This Court granted the issuance of a certificate of probable cause allowing prosecution of the appeal in forma pauperis, but denied a motion for appointment of counsel.

Appellant was arrested in June 1962, and was released on bail. He was arraigned on September 19, 1962, in the Circuit Court of Walker County, Alabama. There is nothing in the record to rebut appellant's argument that he was not advised of his right to have counsel for purposes of the arraignment, or to show that he intelligently waived that right. The minutes state that the Court ascertained that petitioner was employed and was able to retain counsel. Further, petitioner stated that he "would advise the Court on September 24th" relative to the employment of an attorney. However petitioner failed to do so. It is further stated in the minutes that petitioner appeared in court on the 25th, the date set for trial, without an attorney, and "announced ready for trial without an attorney." Petitioner was tried and convicted. On the 26th, after sentence was imposed, petitioner informed the court that he intended to appeal and an appeal bond was fixed at $8,000.

Before the expiration of the time for him to perfect a direct appeal, which he never did, appellant filed a petition for writ of error coram nobis, which was denied by the state trial court on January 18, 1963. The court rejected the claim of the right to counsel in view of the fact that petitioner could afford to retain counsel and of his assertion that he would try his own case. In the denial it was also stated that the time to perfect a direct appeal had not yet expired.

On July 16, 1963, a further order was entered by the state trial court judge denying a petition for habeas corpus. The order recites that petitioner had filed an application for writ of habeas corpus in the Circuit Court of Montgomery County, the county where he was imprisoned, which was dismissed on the motion of petitioner. The order states that there was no legal basis to issue the writ. No appeal was taken from this order. The trial court denied a second petition for a writ of error coram nobis on October 1, 1963, on the grounds that the issue it raised had been previously adjudicated. Appellant sought to appeal this order of denial to the Alabama Court of Appeals. That Court denied the petition because there was no showing of indigency and also there had been a prior adjudication of the issues raised by petitioner. An application for rehearing was overruled and the Supreme Court of Alabama denied a writ of certiorari without opinion.

The file contains a letter, dated June 19, 1964, from the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Montgomery County addressed to the petitioner. The letter acknowledges receipt of a notice of appeal in a habeas corpus proceeding. It states that the transcript of the record would not be made available unless petitioner deposed security for costs in the amount of $17.50.

On June 25, 1964, appellant filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama. Permission was granted to proceed in forma...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Wynn v. Smith
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • 12 Julio 1971
    ...Lee, 384 F.2d 703 (C.A.5 1967); Burns v. Alabama, 360 F.2d 608 (C.A.5 1966); Smart v. Balkcom, 352 F.2d 502 (C.A.5 1965); Hayes v. Holman, 346 F.2d 991 (C.A.5 1965). No such finding was made below by the District Court (though it mentioned the failure to pursue the appeal) since it dismisse......
  • Spivey v. Zant
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • 16 Noviembre 1981
    ...770 (1963). See also, Bloodworth v. Hopper, 539 F.2d 1382 (5th Cir. 1976); Breen v. Beto, 421 F.2d 945 (5th Cir. 1970); Hayes v. Holman, 346 F.2d 991 (5th Cir. 1965). Here, the central issue of primary, historical fact 22 underlying petitioner's sixth amendment challenge is whether he was i......
  • Stubblefield v. Beto
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • 24 Julio 1968
    ...The opinion discusses the matter in terms both of right to assistance of counsel and to appointment of counsel. In Hayes v. Holman, 346 F.2d 991 (5th Cir. 1965), a state case, the record stated that petitioner did not have counsel and had "announced he was ready for trial without an attorne......
  • United States v. Rose, 15405
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • 18 Junio 1965

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