Chambers v. Maroney

399 U.S. 42 (1970)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

A Gulf service station was robbed by two men who carried and displayed guns. The robbers took the money and also the station’s coin money by having the attendant put it in a right-hand glove and fled. Two teenagers, who had earlier noticed a blue compact station wagon circling the block in the vicinity then saw the station wagon speed away from a parking lot close to the Gulf station. They learned that the Gulf station had been robbed and they reported the robbery to the police. The police were informed that four men were in the station wagon and one was wearing a green sweater and the other was wearing a trench coat. A description of the car and the two robbers was broadcast over the police radio. An hour later, a light blue compact station wagon answering the description and carrying four men was stopped by the police about two miles from the Gulf station. Chambers (D) was one of the men in the station wagon. He was wearing a green sweater, and there was a trench coat in the car. The occupants were arrested, and the car was driven to the police station. The police then searched the car and found concealed in a compartment under the dashboard two .38-caliber revolvers, a right-hand glove containing small change, and cards with the name of Raymond Havicon, the attendant at a Boron service station in McKeesport who had been robbed at gunpoint on May 13, 1963. The police got a warrant and searched D's home and seized certain .38-caliber ammunition, including some dumdum bullets similar to those found in one of the guns taken from the station wagon. D's first trial ended in a mistrial. D was convicted of both robberies at the second trial. D did not take a direct appeal from these convictions. In 1965, he sought a writ of habeas corpus in the state court (challenging the admissibility of the materials taken from the car and the ammunition seized in his home, and claiming that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel), which denied the writ. That denial was affirmed on appeal in the Pennsylvania appellate courts. Habeas corpus proceedings were then commenced in the District Court. That petition for habeas corpus was denied without a hearing. The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.