gno.law

In Re Leyva

California Court of Appeal · Crim. No. 3207 · 1955-11-07 · Published · 136 Cal. App. 2d 750

Area
other
Panel
Raymond E. Peters (author)

Analysis

No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.

Opinion

136 Cal.App.2d 750 (1955) In re FERNANDO F. LEYVA, JR., on Habeas Corpus.

Crim. No. 3207. California Court of Appeals. First Dist., Div. One.

Nov. 7, 1955. Fernando F. Leyva, Jr., in pro. per., for Petitioner.

PETERS, P. J.

[1] This petition for habeas corpus is based on the contention that petitioner was convicted by the use of illegally secured evidence. There is no allegation that the point was raised before the trial court or on appeal. The sole contention is that the use of such evidence denied to petitioner "due process" of law. In People v. Cahan, 44 Cal.2d 434 [282 P.2d 905], the Supreme Court was careful to point out that the rule involved was a rule of evidence and not a rule of constitutional law. (See pp. 439-444.) If this determination is to be questioned, it should be in the Supreme Court and not in an intermediate appellate court that is bound by Supreme Court determinations. Under the circumstances, habeas corpus may not be used to relitigate the issue.

The petition for habeas corpus is denied.

Bray, J., and Wood (Fred B.), J., concurred.

Cites, in this corpus

Cited by