The following excerpt is from Keiper v. Cupp, 509 F.2d 238 (9th Cir. 1975):
Our review of the entire state record convinces us that appellant failed to carry his burden on any one or more of these requirements. For that matter, appellant makes no claim that he did not receive a full, fair and adequate hearing in the state court proceeding. Seemingly, he argues that the state court judge reached the wrong conclusion after hearing the evidence on the voluntariness of his statements. The procedure for considering this claimed error is not to require the federal district court to hold an evidentiary hearing, but rather to review the voluntariness issue by examining the state trial record. Anderson v. Nelson, 432 F.2d 55 (CA9 1970).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.