Jarvis v. Nelson, 26440.
| Citation | 440 F.2d 13 |
| Decision Date | 08 April 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 26440.,26440. |
| Parties | Robert J. JARVIS, Appellant, v. Louis S. NELSON, Warden, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Robert J. Jarvis, in pro. per.
Gloria F. DeHart, John T. Murphy, Deputy Attys. Gen., Thomas C. Lynch, Atty. Gen., San Francisco, Cal., for appellee.
Before CHAMBERS, HAMLEY and HUFSTEDLER, Circuit Judges.
Jarvis appeals from an order dismissing his petition for a writ of habeas corpus in which he claimed that an illegally obtained confession was used against him in his state trial. The ground for the dismissal was that the petition did not state a claim for relief. The district court did not grant Jarvis leave to amend. The transcript of the state court proceeding in which the question of the legality of the confession was explored was not presented to the district court.
It may be that Jarvis' conclusory averments cannot be factually supported, but a petition for habeas corpus should not be dismissed without leave to amend unless it appears that no tenable claim for relief can be pleaded were such leave granted. (See Pembrook v. Wilson (9th Cir. 1966) 370 F.2d 37, 39 n. 4; Wilson v. Wilson (9th Cir. 1967) 372 F. 2d 211, 212.) The district court could not rely on the factual determinations of the state court rejecting Jarvis' claim because the transcript of the state trial was not before it. (Selz v. State of California (9th Cir. 1970) 423 F.2d 702; Piche v. Rhay (9th Cir. 1970) 422 F.2d 1309.)
The order is reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings consistent with the views herein expressed.
That is, I would give the petitioner an opportunity to amend his petition. A more detailed recitation of the claim might or might not show that there was a necessity to get the transcript of evidence over from the state court. Here the majority seems to say that the district court must send for the transcript.
We simply get ahead of ourselves here if we order more than leave to amend.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brown v. Hartley
...without leave to amend unless it appears that no tenable claim for relief can be pleaded were such leave granted. Jarvis v. Nelson, 440 F.2d 13, 14 (9th Cir. 1971). Here, Petitioner did not claim that he lacked an opportunity to be heard or a statement of reasons. However, the allegations i......
-
Espinosa v. Foulk, Case No. 1:13-cv-01191-LJO-SKO-HC
...without leave to amend unless it appears that no tenable claim for relief can be pleaded were such leave granted. Jarvis v. Nelson, 440 F.2d 13, 14 (9th Cir. 1971). Petitioner alleges that he is an inmate of the High Desert State Prison serving a sentence of twenty-five years imposed in the......
-
Rice v. Copenhave
...without leave to amend unless it appears that no tenable claim for relief can be pleaded were such leave granted. Jarvis v. Nelson, 440 F.2d 13, 14 (9th Cir. 1971).II. Jurisdiction A federal prisoner who wishes to challenge the validity or constitutionality of his conviction or sentence mus......
-
Lopez v. Brown
...without leave to amend unless it appears that no tenable claim for relief can be pleaded were such leave granted. Jarvis v. Nelson, 440 F.2d 13, 14 (9th Cir. 1971). II. Background Petitioner alleges that he is an inmate of the California State Prison at Corcoran, California (CSP-COR), servi......