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
Barry Don Simmons, Petitioner and Appellant, v. Walter E. Craven, Warden, Folsom State Prison, Respondent and Appellee
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. - 435 F.2d 554
January 4, 1971 Rehearing Denied February 2, 1971
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California; George B. Harris, Judge.
Barry Don Simmons, in pro. per.
Thomas C. Lynch, Cal. Atty. Gen., Derald E. Granberg, Eric Collins, Deputy Attys. Gen., San Francisco, Cal., for appellee.
Before CHAMBERS, HAMLEY and MERRILL, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
The decision of the district court denying habeas corpus relief is affirmed.
Here a pre-Boykin (Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274) guilty plea is attacked.
There is no allegation that he did not understand the consequences of his plea. And, he had competent trial counsel.
The contention that his plea was coerced because there was a threat to use his wife as a witness is made. Assuming this would violate a privilege either he or his wife could claim, the answer is he had competent counsel, a state rule of evidence is involved, and we have held in Moss v. Craven, 9 Cir., 427 F.2d 139, that Boykin is not retroactive.