Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive
Search
Yahoo! News
Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com
Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog
Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
Ralph Anthony Landry, Petitioner and Appellant, v. Louis S. Nelson et al., Appellees
United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. - 416 F.2d 14
September 9, 1969
James Neil, (argued), San Jose, Cal., for appellant.
Karl S. Mayer, (argued), Deputy Atty. Gen., Thomas C. Lynch, Atty. Gen., Derald E. Granberg, Deputy Atty. Gen., San Francisco, Cal., for appellees.
Before CHAMBERS and KOELSCH, Circuit Judges, and KILKENNY, District Judge.
PER CURIAM:
In this federal habeas corpus attack on a state conviction, the district court, on the merits, ruled against appellant.
He asserts there was a conflict of interest between him and another defendant. Thus, it was wrong to be represented on the merits by one attorney for both. The district court found no conflict. No real conflict is suggested here, only speculation.
Appellant has presented this conflict of interest point to the California courts, but has never done so in a proper manner as required by state procedure.
We therefore affirm on the ground that there has been no proper exhaustion of state remedies.