Peters v. Kiff

PETITIONER: Peters
RESPONDENT: Kiff
LOCATION: Iowa State Penitentiary

DOCKET NO.: 71-5078
DECIDED BY: Burger Court (1972-1975)
LOWER COURT: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

CITATION: 407 US 493 (1972)
ARGUED: Feb 22, 1972
DECIDED: Jun 22, 1972

ADVOCATES:
Dorothy T. Beasley -
Edward T. M. Garland -

Facts of the case

Question

Media for Peters v. Kiff

Audio Transcription for Oral Argument - February 22, 1972 in Peters v. Kiff

Warren E. Burger:

We’ll hear arguments next in number 71-5078, Peters against Kiff.

Mr. Garland, you may proceed whenever you’re ready?

Edward T. M. Garland:

Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court.

The case before you comes on a simple record and that it comes simply predicated upon the filing of the federal habeas corpus petition and there was no hearing, and then it was dismissed by the Court.

An appeal was taken to the Fifth Circuit stating denial of equal protection of the law and due process of law as it related to the claims of the petitioner.

Those same claims where in the petition for habeas corpus and they related to the systematic exclusion of blacks from the grand jury and the petit jury.

All of which where taken from the same list of the grand jurors and the petit jurors.

That claim was urged in the Circuit Court and was urged both on the basis of equal protection and due process in violation of Fourteenth Amendment.

It is from the denial in Fifth Circuit Court.

Did you present the both grounds for the Court of Appeals?

Edward T. M. Garland:

Yes, Sir.

I see, they are both that you are petition for habeas corpus?

Edward T. M. Garland:

Yes, Sir.

And you presented both arguments to the Court of Appeals?

Edward T. M. Garland:

Both equal protection and due process.

And they responded to just one?

Edward T. M. Garland:

No Sir, they did not.

They dealt with both the language said petitioner claims a violation of equal protection and due process was the language of the Court’s decision, and then it went on to discuss the question of waiver, and then finally said that there was no denial of equal protection but it acknowledge that we have raised both issues in the prefatory paragraphs and the first paragraphs of the appendix.

This is the most recent opinion of the Court of Appeals?

Edward T. M. Garland:

Yes, Your Honor.

Is that the opinion at page 20 of the record though?

Or whether they dealt with it or not expressly, you presented to them?

Edward T. M. Garland:

Yes, we did.

And I believe, it is in the opinion, Your Honor that we allege –-

You did present the issue?

Yes, we did and it was in the brief that accompanied the petition in the District Court, as well as the briefs in the Circuit Court and by the counsel of this, they would not stated adequately in our question in the petition for certiorari, but we feel both concepts before the Court since it was a matter of the law that was --

Edward T. M. Garland:

The first question in your petition was simply either said stand?

That’s correct.

I have assumed what you are saying is that you argued standing from to stands, from two to that point?

Edward T. M. Garland:

That is correct.