LAWRENCE CHARLES YOUNG, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,
v.
HOYT C. CUPP, SUPERINTENDENT, OREGON STATE PENITENTIARY, RESPONDENT-APPELLEE
LAWRENCE CHARLES YOUNG, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,
HOYT C. CUPP, SUPERINTENDENT, OREGON STATE PENITENTIARY, RESPONDENT-APPELLEE
443 F.2d 378
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (1971)
Opinion of the Court
[*379] PER CURIAM:
The order of the district court is affirmed.
The main point asserted in this collateral attack was improper electronic surveillance. This point is lost by virtue of our Bush v. United States, 438 F. 2d 641 (1971), and United States v. White, 401 U.S. 745, 91 S.Ct. 1122, 28 L.Ed.2d 453 (1971).
A point is made about not letting counsel for him in the district court be heard. Were it not for the subsequent White and Bush cases, there might be prejudice. But in view of events, there was none.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- United States v. White, 401 U.S. 745 (U.S. 1971)
- Bush v. United States, 438 F.2d 641 (9th Cir. 1971)