In what circumstances will a writ of habeas corpus be granted by the Court of Appeal for collateral review?

In considering petitioner's request it must be borne in mind that the contentions of error which can be advanced upon a collateral review are more limited in scope than those which one can urge upon a direct appeal. As a general rule habeas corpus proceedings cannot serve as a substitute for an appeal. Absent special circumstances excusing one's failure to pursue remedies afforded by an appeal, the writ will not lie to review belatedly claimed errors which could have been urged upon a direct appeal. (In re Lopez (1970) 2 Cal.3d 141, 151, 84 Cal.Rptr. 361, 465 P.2d 257; [9 Cal.App.3d 869] In re Black (1967) 66 Cal.2d 881, 886--887, 59 Cal.Rptr. 429, 428 P.2d 293; In re Streeter (1967) 66 Cal.2d 47, 52, 56 Cal.Rptr. 824, 423 P.2d 976.) An accused's failure to avail himself of the remedies of trial and appeal to have his federal constitutional rights vindicated ordinarily constitutes such a deliberate bypassing of orderly state procedures as to justify denial of relief by way of state and federal collateral proceedings. (People v. Jackson (1967) 67 Cal.2d 96, 99, 60 Cal.Rptr. 248, 429 P.2d 600.)