Irving Eugene Ney, and v. E. J. Oberhauser
Irving Eugene NEY, Petitioner and Appellant, v. E. J. OBERHAUSER, Appellee
Opinion
CHAMBERS, Circuit Judge:
In a California state court, Ney was convicted of a rather aggravated mayhem.
There was a confession which was not introduced in evidence. And, the confession was not needed to make the state’s case. It seems clear that the trial court did not intend to admit the confession. But earlier the district attorney in an opening statement to the jury alluded to the confession. This, it is asserted, was just as bad as admitting an illegally obtained confession. The state says the error was harmless.
Notwithstanding the fact that Ney has been to the state courts of California many times, it is now conceded that he has never squarely asked the California courts to examine the record in the light of Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18 , 87 S.Ct. 824 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 .
The district court’s order denying a writ of habeas corpus is affirmed for the reason that we hold this is a case where California should first weigh the applicability of Chapman.
Obviously the affirmance is without prejudice.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 5 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.