Lawrence Charles Young, Petitioner-appellant, v. Hoyt C. Cupp, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary, Respondent-appellee, 443 F.2d 378 (9th Cir. 1971)
Annotate this CaseAppeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon; Alfred T. Goodwin, Judge.
Lawrence Charles Young, in pro. per.
Lee Johnson, Atty. Gen. of Or., Jacob B. Tanzer, Sol. Gen., Jim G. Russell, Asst. Atty. Gen., Salem, Or., for appellee.
Before CHAMBERS, BROWNING and ELY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
The order of the district court is affirmed.
The main point asserted in this collateral attack was improper electronic surveillance. This point is lost by virtue of our Bush v. United States, 438 F.2d 641 (1971), and United States v. White, 401 U.S. 745, 91 S. Ct. 1122, 28 L. Ed. 2d 453 (1971).
A point is made about not letting counsel for him in the district court be heard. Were it not for the subsequent White and Bush cases, there might be prejudice. But in view of events, there was none.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
