James Roseborough, Jr. v. The People of the State of California

Ninth Circuit

James Roseborough, Jr. v. The People of the State of California

322 F.2d 788, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 4211

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 17, 1963

Docket18369_1

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 322 F.2d 788 (James Roseborough, Jr. v. The People of the State of California) 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

James Roseborough, Jr. v. The People of the State of California, 322 F.2d 788, 1963 U.S. App. LEXIS 4211 (9th Cir. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

HAMLEY, Circuit Judge.

James Roseborough, Jr., in custody pursuant to a judgment of a court of the State of California, appeals from an order denying his application for a writ of habeas corpus.

An application for a writ of habeas corpus is the assertion of a right against the person having the applicant in custody. Roseborough is in the custody of E. J. Oberhauser, Superintendent of the California Institution for Men, Chino, California. This official, however, was not named or served as a party in this proceeding, the sole respondent being The People of the State of California.

It follows that, assuming Roseborough is entitled to his release, the district court could not have entered a binding order granting such relief. See Bohm v. Alaska, 9 Cir., 320 F.2d 851.

For this reason alone, and without reaching any other question, the judgment is

Affirmed.

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