Court Opinion

ID: 306840
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2011-08-23 08:51:51+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:09:10.591895
License: Public Domain

469 F.2d 1394
Raymond M. HAMILTON, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Walter E. CRAVEN, Warden, Defendant-Appellant (two cases).
Nos. 71-2737, 71-2844.
United States Court of Appeals,Ninth Circuit.
Dec. 21, 1972.Rehearing Denied Jan. 29, 1973.

Sanford Svetcov, Deputy Atty. Gen.  (argued), W. Eric Collins, Deputy Atty. Gen., Doris H. Maier, Asst. Atty. Gen., Herbert L. Ashby, Chief Asst. Atty. Gen., Evelle J. Younger, Atty. Gen., San Francisco, Cal., for defendant-appellant.
Emil Roy Eisenhardt (argued), Lee Van Boven, of Farella, Braun & Martel, San Francisco, Cal., Michael E. Smith, Berkeley, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee.
Before WRIGHT, KILKENNY and CHOY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:

1
The judgment is affirmed for the reasons stated in the opinion of the district judge.  Hamilton v. Craven, 350 F.Supp. 1251 (N.D.Cal.1971).  We do not reach other issues raised by appellant or by appellee on the cross-appeal.

2
Judgment affirmed.