In re De Maurez

Ninth Circuit

In re De Maurez

138 F.2d 561, 1943 U.S. App. LEXIS 2583

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedOctober 29, 1943

StatusPublished

This text of 138 F.2d 561 (In re De Maurez) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re De Maurez, 138 F.2d 561, 1943 U.S. App. LEXIS 2583 (9th Cir. 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner filed an application for leave to prosecute a petition for writ of mandamus in forma pauperis. He renews the contention made in DeMaurez v. Squier, 9 Cir., 121 F.2d 960, to the effect that the statute under which he was convicted provides for a maximum penalty of five years, whereas, he was sentenced to a term of ten years under 18 U.S.C.A. § 73. Petitioner states that he filed a motion in the United States District Court for the District of Oregon for modification of the judgment to conform to his view and that such order was denied by Judge Fee of that court on July 12, 1943.

Mandamus does not lie to compel a judge to act in a particular manner, as requested by the petitioner. The court having acted, mandamus will not lie to correct the order even if it be erroneous. Petition for leave to proceed on mandamus in forma pauperis is denied.

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

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner filed an application for leave to prosecute a petition for writ of mandamus in forma pauperis. He renews the contention made in DeMaurez v. Squier, 9 Cir., 121 F.2d 960, to the effect that the statute under which he was convicted provides for a maximum penalty of five years, whereas, he was sentenced to a term of ten years under 18 U.S.C.A. § 73. Petitioner states that he filed a motion in the United States District Court for the District of Oregon for modification of the judgment to conform to his view and that such order was denied by Judge Fee of that court on July 12, 1943.

Mandamus does not lie to compel a judge to act in a particular manner, as requested by the petitioner. The court having acted, mandamus will not lie to correct the order even if it be erroneous. Petition for leave to proceed on mandamus in forma pauperis is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

138 F.2d 561, 1943 U.S. App. LEXIS 2583, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-de-maurez-ca9-1943.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack