State of Louisiana v. Walker

Decision Date10 May 1963
Docket NumberNo. 674.,674.
Citation217 F. Supp. 168
PartiesSTATE OF LOUISIANA ex rel. James BYRNES, Petitioner, v. Victor G. WALKER, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.
CourtU.S. District Court — Eastern District of Louisiana

Edward Donald Moseley, Baton Rouge, La., appointed by the Court, for petitioner.

Jack P. F. Gremillion, Atty. Gen. of Louisiana, and Scallan Walsh, Asst. Atty. Gen., Baton Rouge, La., for defendant.

WEST, District Judge.

Petitioner, James Byrnes, was charged in a Louisiana State Court with having committed the crime of simple burglary. He ultimately pleaded guilty and was sentenced to serve six years in the Louisiana State Penitentiary. He now applies to this Court for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus, contending that he has been, and is being denied the constitutional rights guaranteed him by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution in that (1) he was illegally arrested and imprisoned without a warrant and without just cause, and (2) he was arraigned, convicted, sentenced and imprisoned without the aid or assistance of counsel, and (3) he was imprisoned and held in jail an unreasonably long time prior to arraignment and before any charges were filed against him.

Upon receipt of the application this Court issued an order appointing Edward Donald Moseley, Esquire, as attorney to represent petitioner herein, and directed respondents to show cause, if any they could, why this writ of habeas corpus should not issue. Respondents then filed what amounted to a general denial of petitioner's allegations, and, at the appointed time, the Court heard oral arguments of counsel for both sides. After due consideration of the entire record in this case, and after hearing and considering the arguments of counsel, the Court is convinced beyond a question of doubt that petitioner's constitutional rights have indeed been violated, and that the writ of habeas corpus prayed for should be granted. The Court's Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law herein are as follows.

Petitioner was arrested, without a warrant, on suspicion of simple burglary on October 29, 1960. This arrest was made by the police of the City of Monroe, Parish of Ouachita, State of Louisiana, and on November 1, 1960, he was removed to the Morehouse Parish jail at Bastrop, Louisiana. He was held, practically incommunicado, in this jail for three months and twenty days, or until February 21, 1961, before he was arraigned or allowed any court appearance whatsoever. During all of this time he was without the benefit of legal counsel. He was also held in jail for over two and one-half months, or until January 23, 1961, before any formal charge was even filed against him. It is further significant to note that the formal charges were not filed against petitioner until January 23, 1961, which happened to be the same day on which an alleged confession was obtained from the petitioner by a deputy sheriff of Morehouse Parish. On February 21, 1961, three months and twenty days after his arrest and incarceration, petitioner was formally arraigned before Honorable D. I. Garrett, Judge of the Fourth Judicial District Court for the Parish of Morehouse, State of Louisiana. There is no showing that he had ever been presented with a copy of the bill of information prior to his arraignment, and he contends that he had never been informed of the exact charges against him prior to arraignment.

When arraigned, he pleaded guilty, waived delay for sentencing, and was sentenced to serve six years in the State Penitentiary. At no time from the date of his arrest to the date of sentencing was petitioner represented by counsel, and at no time was he advised by the Court of his right to such representation. The minutes of the court proceedings make no mention of his being advised of his right to counsel, nor do they mention any waiver by petitioner of his right to be represented by counsel.

Petitioner, after being sentenced and incarcerated at the State Penitentiary at Angola, Louisiana, filed an application with the Twentieth Judicial District Court for the Parish of West Feliciana, Louisiana, for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus. This was denied, without hearing. Petitioner was still not represented by counsel. As a matter of fact, the denial of his application was contained in a letter written by the Clerk of Court, dated June 6, 1961, addressed to petitioner, simply stating that the Judge had denied the application because "he finds no basis of law in your petition on which to grant said application". Petitioner then applied directly to the Louisiana Supreme Court for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus, which application was also summarily denied on June 22, 1961, with the notation, signed by all of the Justices of that Court, that "the showing made in the application does not justify the relief sought". No hearing on this application was held. Petitioner was still without the benefit of counsel.

Petitioner then applied directly to the Supreme Court of the United States for a writ of certiorari, and on April 23, 1962, that Court granted petitioner's request to proceed in forma pauperis, granted the writ of certiorari, vacated the judgment, and remanded the case to the Louisiana Supreme Court for hearing. The Louisiana Supreme Court in turn transferred the matter back to the Twentieth Judicial District Court at St. Francisville, Louisiana. In the meantime, petitioner had filed a motion with the State Supreme Court requesting the appointment of an attorney to represent him, and on June 1, 1962, the Clerk of the Louisiana Supreme Court advised petitioner by letter that he was returning his motion for appointment of counsel to him as "this matter should be taken up with the District Court".

Then, on June 12, 1962, the Judge of the Twentieth Judicial District Court, State of Louisiana, notified petitioner by letter that "no habeas corpus proceeding will issue from this Court." There was still no hearing held in this matter in spite of the mandate from the United States Supreme Court, and petitioner was still without legal counsel. The letter received by the petitioner from the Judge of the Twentieth Judicial District Court, State of Louisiana, reads as follows:

"June 12, 1962 "James Byrnes "LSP 54355 "Angola, Louisiana "RE: Yourself vs. V. G. Walker Warden

"Dear Mr. Byrnes,
"Mrs. Shirley Winston, Clerk of Court has referred to me your letter of the 4th along with numerous subpoenas for witnesses and a motion for forma pauperis.
"I have reviewed your original application to this Court and all enclosures and find that no valid grounds at law are shown for granting a habeas corpus proceeding from this Court. Your contentions are that you were denied the use of phone, visits from friends and relatives, denied the opportunity to consult with counsel, and held in jail for 110 days prior to arraignment all going to the denial to you of your Constitutional rights.
"The decision of this Court is based on the law alone as contained in R.S. 15:116 et
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Madison v. Tahash
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Minnesota
    • January 17, 1966
    ...84 S.Ct. 1941, 12 L.Ed.2d 1053 (1964) (49 day detention before being charged not lack of due process) with State of Louisiana ex rel. Byrnes v. Walker, 217 F.Supp. 168 (E.D.La.1963) (3½ month delay in arraignment held "indefensible.") In the latter case, the court granted a writ of habeas c......
  • Blake v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • April 15, 1964
    ...v. Cochran, 369 U.S. 506, 516, 82 S.Ct. 884, 8 L.Ed.2d 70; Lee v. United States, 322 F.2d 770, 777 (5th Cir.1963); Louisiana v. Walker, 217 F.Supp. 168, 172 (E.D.La.1963); Balkcom v. Shores, 219 Ga. 429, 134 S.E.2d 3; King v. State, Fla.App., 157 So.2d 440; In re Garofone, 80 N.J.Super. 259......
  • Knight v. Balkcom
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • July 18, 1966
    ...less is not a waiver. Carnley v. Cochran, 1962, 369 U.S. 506, 516, 82 S.Ct. 884, 8 L.Ed.2d 70, 77; State of Louisiana ex rel. Byrnes v. Walker, E.D.La.1963, 217 F.Supp. 168, 171-172. There is no record of the state court proceeding when Knight pleaded guilty to an offense for which he could......
  • Pitt v. MacDougall, 18279
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • November 11, 1964
    ...v. Cochran, 369 U.S. 506, 516, 82 S.Ct. 884, 8 L.Ed.2d 70; Lee v. United States, 322 F.2d 770, 777 (5th Cir.1963); Louisiana v. Walker, 217 F.Supp. 168, 172 (E.D.La.1963); Balkcom v. Shores, 219 Ga. 429, 134 S.E.2d 3; King v. State, Fla.App., 157 So.2d 440; In re Garofone, 80 N.J.Super. 259......
  • 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