TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Irvin Russell Jones v. H. C. Cupp, Warden, Oregon State Penitentiary

Irvin Russell JONES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. H. C. CUPP, Warden, Oregon State Penitentiary, Respondent-Appellee

Jones v. H. C. Cupp,, Or. State Penitentiary, 452 F.2d 1091 (9th Cir. 1971)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
December 29, 1971
Docket
No. 71-1034
Judges
Chambers, Duniway, Per Curiam, Trask
Citations
452 F.2d 10911971 U.S. App. LEXIS 6380

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court denying petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus. Petitioner contends that the district court should have granted the writ because (1) his guilty plea to second-degree murder was induced by an allegedly coerced confession, (2) the plea was induced by a promise of leniency, and (3) the State of Oregon has arbitrarily refused to apply a 1963 reduction in the penalty for second-degree murder to his 1941 conviction. We affirm.

The murder which gave rise to the conviction occurred on the night of July 17, 1941, in The Dalles, Oregon. Petitioner was arrested two days later at his parents’ home in Canby. Following a police interrogation which lasted approximately nine hours, petitioner gave a complete confession to the crime.

He was charged with first-degree murder, a charge which, at that time, carried a death penalty unless the jury recommended life imprisonment. On September 4, 1941, after petitioner had not heard from his retained counsel, the state trial court appointed counsel to represent him. Two weeks later petitioner and his appointed counsel appeared in court and tendered a plea of guilty to second degree murder which, at that time, carried a life sentence. The plea was ultimately accepted and a life sentence imposed.

One of the allegations in petitioner’s federal habeas application was that his confession was coerced and this induced him to plead guilty. The district court did not resolve the conflicting testimony between petitioner and the district attorney who prosecuted the case, but after an evidentiary hearing and an examination of state court records, found that the plea was voluntarily and intelligently entered. This *1093 was proper. Absent a showing that petitioner’s court-appointed attorney was incompetent, proof that a prior confession may have been involuntary is not a ground for setting aside a guilty plea. McMann v. Richardson, 397 U.S. 759, 770-771 , 90 S.Ct. 1441 , 25 L.Ed.2d 763 (1970). Furthermore, petitioner’s plea was entered two months after he gave the allegedly coerced confession and after consultation with his attorney. Hence, his contention that the coercive influences surrounding the confession carried over to the guilty plea finds no basis in the record.

Compare Chambers v. Florida, 309 U.S. 227 , 60 S.Ct. 472 , 84 L.Ed. 716 (1940).

Petitioner also alleged that his plea was induced by unfulfilled promises which, if true, would be a basis for finding his plea involuntary.

See Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742, 755 , 90 S.Ct. 1463 , 25 L.Ed.2d 747 (1970). However, on that point the court below reviewed the transcript of testimony in the state court post-conviction proceeding, and found that Jones received a full and fair evidentiary hearing with express findings of fact which were supported by the record. The district court did not abuse its discretion in accepting those findings. 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d).

In 1963 the Oregon Legislature eliminated the death penalty in first-degree murder cases and reduced the maximum sentence for second-degree murder from life to twenty-five years. O.R.S. § 163.020. Petitioner renews his contention that failure to apply the reduced penalty to persons sentenced before the effective date of the amendment is an arbitrary classification and denies him Equal Protection of the laws.

The argument is without merit. Savings provisions have long been a part of our law, both in criminal and civil cases.

See, e. g., 1 U.S.C. § 109 . “There is nothing unconstitutional in a legislature’s conferring a benefit on prisoners only prospectively.” Comerford v. Commonwealth, 233 F.2d 294, 295 (1st Cir. 1956).

The judgment is affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

Cited by 17 cases

View all citing references →
1974: 21975: 21976: 21977: 11979: 11980: 11983: 11990: 12002: 22019: 12020: 12022: 12025: 119742026peak 1974 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. In re Kapperman522 P.2d 657 (Cal. 1974)
  2. United States v. Matta-LopezNo. 25-3403 (9th Cir. Sept. 2, 2025)
  3. Arthur Jackson, Jr. v. State of Alabama, Jasper Lee Cooks v. Circuit Court of Mobile County530 F.2d 1231 (5th Cir. 1976)
  4. In re Stinnette94 Cal. App. 3d 800 (1979)
  5. Larry Frazier v. John R703 F.2d 30 (2d Cir. 1983)
  6. People v. Arellano524 P.2d 305 (Colo. 1974)

Most recent

  1. United States v. Matta-LopezNo. 25-3403 (9th Cir. Sept. 2, 2025)
  2. (HC) Clay v. CovelloNo. 2:20-cv-02120 (E.D. Cal. July 6, 2022)
  3. Botello v. NeuschmidNo. 3:19-cv-06761 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 20, 2020)
  4. Drawn v. NueschidNo. 3:19-cv-02150 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 15, 2019)
  5. People v. Fryman119 Cal. Rptr. 2d 557 (2002)
  6. Ex Parte Zimmerman838 So. 2d 408 (Ala. 2002)

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.

Authorities cited 4

DepthCaseCited by
Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742 (1970) 5,834
McMann v. Richardson, 397 U.S. 759 (1970) 4,509
Chambers v. Florida, 309 U.S. 227 (1940) 630
Comerford v. Massachusetts, 233 F.2d 294 (1st Cir. 1956) 18

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list