In re Leyva

California Court of Appeal Nov 7, 1955 No. Crim. No. 3207Published

Before: Peters

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. Habeas corpus cannot be used to relitigate the admissibility of evidence when the issue was not raised at trial or on appeal, particularly because the exclusionary rule is a rule of evidence rather than a constitutional requirement.

Issues

Whether the use of allegedly illegally secured evidence constitutes a denial of due process cognizable via habeas corpus when not raised at trial or on appeal.

Disposition. Denied

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“the rule involved was a rule of evidence and not a rule of constitutional law.”

“Under the circumstances, habeas corpus may not be used to relitigate the issue.”

PETERS, P. J. 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.

In re Leyva

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief