Vaino Uski v. Walter T. Stone, Superintendent, Cent. Training Facility, Soledad, California, the People of the State of California, 523 F.2d 14 (9th Cir. 1975). · Go Syfert
Search
Vaino Uski v. Walter T. Stone, Superintendent, Cent. Training Facility, Soledad, California, the People of the State of California, 523 F.2d 14 (9th Cir. 1975). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
1 citation event across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Clark v. New Century Mortgage Company (nvd, 2025-08-11)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Clark v. New Century Mortgage Company
D. Nev. · 2025 · confidence medium
Curry v. Jensen, 523 F.2d 14 387, 388 (9th Cir. 1975). 15 Under § 455, “recusal is appropriate where ‘a reasonable person with knowledge of all 16 the facts would conclude that the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned.’” Yagman 17 v. Republic Ins., 987 F.2d 622, 626 (9th Cir. 1993) (quoting In re Yagman, 796 F.2d 1165 , 1179 18 (9th Cir. 1986)).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Vaino USKI, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Walter T. STONE, Superintendent, Central Training Facility, Soledad, California, the People of the State of California, Respondents-Appellees
74-1896.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Aug 25, 1975.
523 F.2d 14
Vaino Uski, for appellant-in pro per., Evelle J. Younger, Atty. Gen., San Francisco, Cal., for respondents-appellees.
Merrill, Hufstedler, Smith.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

OPINION

Before MERRILL and HUFSTEDLER, Circuit Judges, and SMITH, * District Judge. PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from an order denying a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The question presented is whether the district court erred in refusing to consider alleged constitutional violations that occurred in connection with a motion to suppress evidence when proceedings on that motion were followed by a guilty plea. In denying the writ the district court followed this court in Mann v. Smith, 488 F.2d 245 (9th Cir. 1973). Since decision by the district court the Supreme Court, in Lefkowitz v. Newsome, 420 U.S. 283, 95 S.Ct. 886, 43 L.Ed.2d 196 (1975), has required a contrary result in the light of Cal.Penal Code, § 1538.5(m).

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings. In our view appointment of counsel is warranted.