Ben Hitchcock, Plaintiff-appellant, v. State of Arizona, Frank A. Eyman, Warden, et al., Defendant-appellee, 446 F.2d 46 (9th Cir. 1971)

Hitchcock, an Arizona prisoner, appeals from the denial of this petition for a writ of habeas corpus following an evidentiary hearing.¹ 

The only contention that merits discussion is Hitchcock's claim that publicity preceding and during his homicide trial prejudiced him. The publicity consisted of a few newspaper stories. The pretrial accounts gave some of Hitchcock's personal history and his and certain eyewitnesses' versions of the homicide. The newspaper stories published during the trial simply reported the course of the trial. We have examined the clippings, and we find nothing in them that supports his assertion that their publication deprived him of a fair trial. (See, e. g., Evans v. Arizona (9th Cir. 1969) 410 F.2d 1122; Gawne v. United States (9th Cir. 1969) 409 F.2d 1399, cert. denied (1970) 397 U.S. 943, 90 S. Ct. 956, 25 L. Ed. 2d 123; Loraine v. United States (9th Cir.) 396 F.2d 335, cert. denied (1968) 393 U.S. 933, 89 S. Ct. 292, 21 L. Ed. 2d 270.)

The judgment is affirmed.