Rosenberg v. Denno

346 U.S. 271, 73 S. Ct. 1152, 97 L. Ed. 2d 1607, 97 L. Ed. 1607, 1953 U.S. LEXIS 1904
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided June 15, 1953·No. 1M·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The motion for leave to file petition for an original writ of habeas corpus is denied.

Mr. Justice Black dissents.

Mr. Justice Frankfurter.

The disposition of an application to this Court for habeas corpus is so rarely to be made by this Court *272 directly that Congress has given the Court authority to transfer such an application to an appropriate district court. 28 U. S. C. § 2241. I do not favor such a disposition of this application because the substance of the allegations now made has already been considered by the District Court for the Southern District of New York and on review by the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Neither can I join the Court in denying the application without more. I would set the application down for hearing before the full Court tomorrow forenoon. Oral argument frequently has a force beyond what the written word conveys.

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

Rosenberg v. Denno, 346 U.S. 271, 73 S. Ct. 1152, 97 L. Ed. 2d 1607, 97 L. Ed. 1607, 1953 U.S. LEXIS 1904 (1953).

346 U.S. 271 (Rosenberg v. Denno) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Godinez
434 N.E.2d 1121 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1982)
Goldsby v. State
123 So. 2d 429 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1960)
Rosenberg v. United States
346 U.S. 273 (Supreme Court, 1953)