Court Opinion

ID: 9454309
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 18:42:46.767122+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:34:03.960763
License: Public Domain

CHAMBERS, Circuit Judge
(dissenting):
I do not believe that Jackson v. Denno, 378 U.S. 368, 84 S.Ct. 1774 (1964), and Sims v. Georgia, 385 U.S. 538, 87 S.Ct. 639, require us to do what the majority has done herein.
The case was tried in 1946 before a judge who died November 21, 1949.
I would say that there is just as good an argument on the state record that the state trial judge applied the Massachusetts rule as that he applied the New York rule. On a case pre-Sims, I would require the petitioner to show by book and page wherein in the state record that the New York rule was applied. I had always thought in habeas corpus the burden of proof was on petitioner.
It is true that Sims says the fact of the application (of the Massachusetts rule) must appear with “unmistakable clarity.” But why did the majority say in Sims, “Jackson, having been decided June 22, 1964, was binding on the courts of Georgia in this case [Sims], it having been tried October 7, 1964 ?” True it is said it is a constitutional rule, but I think Sims lays down a procedural rule to assure compliance with the constitutional mandate that confessions not be coerced. Thus, I would leave on an old case the burden of proof on petitioner on the existing state record.