In re Anderson

Ninth Circuit

In re Anderson

117 F.2d 939, 1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 4378

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided February 5, 1941·Published·Cited by 11 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Application for leave to file petition for writ of habeas corpus in forma pauperis in this court is denied because without merit for two reasons: One, our power as a court to issue such writs is in aid of our appellate jurisdiction only. De Maurez v. Swope, 100 F.2d 530; Ferguson v. Swope, 9 Cir., 109 F.2d 152; De Maurez v. Swope, 9 Cir., 110 F.2d 564. Two, the lower federal courts should not consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus where the petitioner is detained under state process save in exceptional cases. Urquhart v. Brown, 205 U.S. 179, 27 S.Ct. 459, 51 L.Ed. 760; Ex parte Melendez, 9 Cir., 98 F.2d.791; Ex parte Penney, 9 Cir., 103 F.2d 27; Ex parte Jefferson, 9 Cir., 106 F.2d 471.

This is not such a case.

Application denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Application for leave to file petition for writ of habeas corpus in forma pauperis in this court is denied because without merit for two reasons: One, our power as a court to issue such writs is in aid of our appellate jurisdiction only. De Maurez v. Swope, 100 F.2d 530; Ferguson v. Swope, 9 Cir., 109 F.2d 152; De Maurez v. Swope, 9 Cir., 110 F.2d 564. Two, the lower federal courts should not consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus where the petitioner is detained under state process save in exceptional cases. Urquhart v. Brown, 205 U.S. 179, 27 S.Ct. 459, 51 L.Ed. 760; Ex parte Melendez, 9 Cir., 98 F.2d.791; Ex parte Penney, 9 Cir., 103 F.2d 27; Ex parte Jefferson, 9 Cir., 106 F.2d 471.

This is not such a case.

Application denied.

In re Anderson, 117 F.2d 939, 1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 4378 (9th Cir. 1941).

Pincite

117 F.2d 939 (In re Anderson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related