Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

John Edward DAUGHERTY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Walter E. CRAVEN, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.

PER CURIAM:

The dismissal of the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is reversed and the case remanded. The district court must determine whether the ex parte orders revoking probation violated the Sixth Amendment. See Mempa v. Rhay, 389 U.S. 128, 88 S.Ct. 254, 19 L.Ed.2d 336 (1967), and McConnell v. Rhay, 393 U.S. 2, 89 S.Ct. 32, 21 L.Ed.2d 2 (1968).

From the information before us, it appears that the issue has not been presented to, or considered by, the California courts. The district court may hold the petition in abeyance for a reasonable time in order to afford the California courts the first opportunity to consider the issue. Compare Ney v. Oberhauser, 419 F.2d 828 (9th Cir. 1969).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

DAUGHERTY v. CRAVEN
(Apr 27, 1970)