Holt v. Simpson

Decision Date21 January 1965
Docket NumberNo. 14655.,14655.
Citation340 F.2d 853
PartiesFrances Lenore HOLT, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Marcia SIMPSON, Superintendent of Wisconsin Home for Women, and the State of Wisconsin, Respondents-Appellees.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit

Sherwood Slate, Milwaukee, Wis., for appellant.

William A. Platz, Asst. Atty. Gen., Madison, Wis., for appellees.

Before KNOCH, CASTLE and SWYGERT, Circuit Judges.

SWYGERT, Circuit Judge.

Petitioner Frances Lenore Holt is an inmate of the Wisconsin Home for Women at Taycheedah, Wisconsin. She is serving a life sentence imposed by a Wisconsin state court after a jury found her guilty of first degree murder of her newly born infant. Her conviction was affirmed by the Wisconsin supreme court, Holt v. State, 17 Wis.2d 468, 117 N.W.2d 626 (1962); and a petition for certiorari to the United States Supreme Court was denied, Holt v. Wisconsin, 374 U.S. 844, 83 S.Ct. 1900, 10 L.Ed.2d 1064 (1963). Subsequently, the federal district court denied her application for writ of habeas corpus, but granted a certificate of probable cause. This appeal followed.

In the district court petitioner claimed that her constitutional rights were violated by the Wisconsin authorities because of an unreasonable search and seizure and the introduction during her trial of evidence procured by the search. It was agreed by counsel representing petitioner and respondents that no evidentiary hearing was required and that the application for the writ could be decided on the record presented in the Wisconsin supreme court. We shall summarize the facts disclosed by the state court record.

Petitioner became pregnant about September, 1959, at a time when her husband, Frank Holt, was in prison, He returned home in April, 1960. On July 1, 1960, the petitioner gave birth to a baby boy unassisted on the davenport in her home. After the baby was born, she picked it up, placed it in a bag, put it in the furnace, and then lit a fire. About ten days later petitioner related the incident to a friend, Mildred Rozanski, who then reported it to a Milwaukee police officer. The next day, Sunday, July 17, police officer Robert Gaurke and policewoman Joan Hobus of the Milwaukee police were sent to petitioner's home to investigate the report of Mrs. Rozanski. They were met at the door by petitioner's husband. After identifying themselves as police officers and saying they wished to see petitioner, they were invited in by Mr. Holt. He identified his wife. The officers identified themselves. They told petitioner they wished to speak with her in private. She showed them into a bedroom where the officers proceeded to ask her about the report they had received. During the interrogation petitioner admitted that she had given birth to a baby and that she had put it in the furnace. Thereupon the officers asked to be shown the furnace and petitioner led the way to the basement. Although there is conflicting evidence concerning the precise order of events and the exact words used at this point of the investigation, it is clear that the officers searched the furnace, found the charred torso of a baby, and then placed petitioner under arrest.

Petitioner contended at her trial that the baby was stillborn and that she burned it because she did not have funds to have it buried. The Wisconsin supreme court held there was sufficient evidence, however, for the jury to find that the baby had, in fact, been born alive.

The question of an unlawful search and seizure was raised initially in the trial court. The court held that petitioner had voluntarily consented to the search made in the home. The supreme court affirmed. In so doing it recognized that under Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 81 S.Ct. 1684, 6 L.Ed.2d 1081 (1961), the fourth amendment to the Constitution was applicable. Although deploring "the technique employed" and the failure by the officers to obtain a search warrant, the court held that various statements made by the petitioner were sufficient to indicate that she freely consented to the search.1

The district judge in the instant proceeding agreed with the reasoning of the Wisconsin courts and said that "the petitioner's consent to the search and seizure is shown in the record by clear and positive evidence, we * * * need not decide whether the search and seizure was otherwise justified."

With deference to the holding of the Wisconsin supreme court and the views of the district judge, we hold that regardless of consent, the search of the furnace and the seizure of the evidence were lawful. We affirm the denial of the petition on the basis that the search was reasonable without deciding the specific question of whether there was voluntary consent to it.

The police officers went to petitioner's home to investigate the bizarre story related by Mildred Rozanski. This was normal investigative...

To continue reading

Request your trial
35 cases
  • People v. Marshall
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • July 16, 1968
    ...63 Cal.2d 659, 667, 47 Cal.Rptr. 788, 408 P.2d 116; Willson v. Superior Court (1956) 46 Cal.2d 291, 294, 294 P.2d 36; Holt v. Simpson (7th Cir. 1965) 340 F.2d 853, 856; People v. Griffin (1967) 250 Cal.App.2d 545, 552, 58 Cal.Rptr. 707; People v. Torres (1961) 51 Cal.2d 864, 17 Cal.Rptr. 49......
  • People v. Cockrell
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • December 9, 1965
    ...outset and the arrest and search are nearly simultaneous and constitute for all practical purposes but one transaction. (Holt v. Simpson (1965) 7 Cir., 340 F.2d 853, 856; see United States v. Cangelose (1964) D.C., 230 F.Supp. 544, 550; but see Lee v. United States (1956) 98 U.S.App.D.C. 97......
  • Ybarra v. Illinois
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • November 28, 1979
    ...States v. Gorman, 355 F.2d 151, 159 (CA2 1965), cert. denied, 384 U.S. 1024, 86 S.Ct. 1962, 16 L.Ed.2d 1027 (1966); Holt v. Simpson, 340 F.2d 853, 856 (CA7 1965). As already noted, I believe it error to analyze this case as if the police were under an obligation to act within one of the nar......
  • United States v. Squella-Avendano
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • August 25, 1971
    ...401 U.S. 912, 91 S.Ct. 880, 27 L.Ed.2d 811 (and cases there cited); Kinser v. Cooper, 413 F.2d 730 (6th Cir. 1969); Holt v. Simpson, 340 F.2d 853 (7th Cir. 1965). 39 395 U.S. 752, 89 S.Ct. 2034, 23 L.Ed. 2d 685 40 Id. at 763, 89 S.Ct. 2034. 41 357 U.S. 301, 78 S.Ct. 1190, 2 L.Ed.2d 1332 (19......
  • 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