Waley v. Johnston, No. 1006
| Court | United States Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | PER CURIAM; JACKSON |
| Citation | 86 L.Ed. 1302,316 U.S. 101,62 S.Ct. 964 |
| Parties | WALEY v. JOHNSTON, Warden. Subnitted on Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis |
| Docket Number | No. 1006 |
| Decision Date | 06 April 1942 |
v.
JOHNSTON, Warden.
Subnitted on Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis April 6, 1942.
Page 102
Harmon M. Waley, pro se.
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner filed his petition for habeas corpus in the district court, alleging upon oath that he had been cocerced, by intimidation and threats by an agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, to plead guilty to an indictment for kidnapping, and that he is held in custody by respondent under the consequent judgment of conviction and commitment.
The petition stated generally that threats of Federal Bureau of Investigation agents to throw petitioner out of a window and 'beat me up' 'didn't bother me'. But it specifically alleged that petitioner's plea of guilty had been induced by the threats of a named Federal Bureau of Investigation agent to publish false statements and manufacture false evidence that the kidnapped person had been injured, and by such publications and false evidence to incite the public and to cause the State of Washington to hang the petitioner and the other defendants.
Page 103
The district court ordered respondent to show cause why a writ should not issue and appointed counsel to represent petitioner. Respondent's return to the order included certified copies of the docket entries, indictment, transcript of proceedings on arraignment, entry of plea, judgment and sentence, and commitment papers. The transcript discloses that the trial court had explained to petitioner his right to be assisted by counsel and had appointed counsel who represented him at the trial. The return also included an affidavit of a special agent of the Bureau of Investigation, not the one mentioned in the petition, stating that petitioner, in affiant's presence, voluntarily signed two statements confessing his guilt, and that no threat or promise to petitioner of any kind was made in affiant's presence. The return made no denial of the allegations of coercion specifically set forth and relied on in the petition.
The district court denied the application for the writ without hearing evidence and without directing the production of the prisoner in court. It concluded that the allegations of coercion by threatening to publish false statements and manufacture false evidence were inconsistent with petitioner's statement that threats by Government agents to throw him out of the window and beat him up 'didn't bother' him; that the transcript filed with the return showed that petitioner was neither 'actuated nor induced by fear'; and that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Moore v. United States, CIVIL ACTION NO. 13-00047-KD-B
...to the procedural default rule for claims that could not be presented without further factual development. . . . In Waley v. Johnston, 316 U.S. 101, 62 S. Ct. 964, 86 L. Ed. 1302 (1942) (per curiam), we held that there was such an exception for a claim that a plea of guilty had been coerced......
-
Withrow v. Williams, No. 91-1030
...at 450-451, 83 S.Ct., at 854-855 (Harlan, J., dissenting). Finally, the jurisdictional line was openly abandoned in Waley v. Johnston, 316 U.S. 101, 104-105, 62 S.Ct. 964, 965-966, 86 L.Ed. 1302 (1942). See P. Bator, D. Meltzer, P. Mishkin & D. Shapiro, Hart and Wechsler's The Federal Court......
-
Murray v. Carrier, No. 84-1554
...86, 43 S.Ct. 265, 67 L.Ed. 543 (1923); Johnson v. Page 517 Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 58 S.Ct. 1019, 82 L.Ed. 1461 (1938); Waley v. Johnston, 316 U.S. 101, 62 S.Ct. 964, 86 L.Ed. 1302 (1942); Brown v. Allen, 344 U.S. 443, 73 S.Ct. 397, 97 L.Ed. 469 (1953); Fay v. Noia, 372 U.S. 391, 83 S.Ct. 822......
-
People v. Collins, No. S075232.
...exercise of that right. (United States v. Jackson (1968) 390 U.S. 570, 580-582, 88 S.Ct. 1209, 20 L.Ed.2d 138; Waley v. Johnston (1942) 316 U.S. 101, 104, 62 S.Ct. 964, 86 L.Ed. 1302.) Coercion in either form has been rejected, whether its source is executive, legislative, or judicial in na......
-
Moore v. United States, CIVIL ACTION NO. 13-00047-KD-B
...to the procedural default rule for claims that could not be presented without further factual development. . . . In Waley v. Johnston, 316 U.S. 101, 62 S. Ct. 964, 86 L. Ed. 1302 (1942) (per curiam), we held that there was such an exception for a claim that a plea of guilty had been coerced......
-
People v. Collins, No. S075232.
...exercise of that right. (United States v. Jackson (1968) 390 U.S. 570, 580-582, 88 S.Ct. 1209, 20 L.Ed.2d 138; Waley v. Johnston (1942) 316 U.S. 101, 104, 62 S.Ct. 964, 86 L.Ed. 1302.) Coercion in either form has been rejected, whether its source is executive, legislative, or judicial in na......
-
Jones v. Commonwealth, Record No. 131385
...the constitutional rights of the accused." Id. at 272 n.7 (quoting Wainwright v. Sykes, 433 U.S. 72, 79 (1977)) (citing Waley v. Johnston, 316 U.S. 101, 104-05 (1942)). Habeas corpus is "not restricted to those cases where the judgment of conviction is void for want of jurisdiction of the t......
-
Brecht v. Abrahamson, No. 91-1835
...between "no jurisdiction" and "grievous error" had eroded so substantially that the Court discarded the limitation. Waley v. Johnston, 316 U.S. 101, 62 S.Ct. 964, 86 L.Ed. 1302 (1942) (conviction based on coerced confession). Not for a further 11 years, however, did the Court first use coll......
-
THE HOUSE ALWAYS WINS: DOCTRINE AND ANIMUS IN CALIFORNIA'S COVID-19 PRISON LITIGATION.
...L. SCH. J. HUM. RTS. 375, 377-90 (1998) (discussing the development of habeas corpus in English Common Law). (169.) See Waley v. Johnston, 316 U.S. 101, 104 (170.) William H. Speck, Statistics on Federal Habeas Corpus, 10 OHIO ST. L. J. 337, 340 (1949). (171.) Brown v. Allen, 344 U.S. 443, ......