United States v. Amor

Fifth Circuit

United States v. Amor

68 F. 885, 16 C.C.A. 60, 1895 U.S. App. LEXIS 2922

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided May 7, 1895·No. Nos. 265, 266, 291, 297, 302, and 309·Published

Opinion

PERI CURIAM.

These cases, in the main similar to U. S. v. Arteago (just decided) 68 Fed. 883, are distinguished from them in that the warrant of deportation issued toy the honorable secretary of the treasury does not contain the names of the petitioners in the court below (appellees here), nor any name or names idem sonans, and there is no evidence, even if such were admissible, tending to identify the appellees with any name or names recited in the warrants. As the return to the writ of habeas corpus shows no authority to detain the petitioners, the judgments of the circuit court are correct, and the same are affirmed.

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

PERI CURIAM.

These cases, in the main similar to U. S. v. Arteago (just decided) 68 Fed. 883, are distinguished from them in that the warrant of deportation issued toy the honorable secretary of the treasury does not contain the names of the petitioners in the court below (appellees here), nor any name or names idem sonans, and there is no evidence, even if such were admissible, tending to identify the appellees with any name or names recited in the warrants. As the return to the writ of habeas corpus shows no authority to detain the petitioners, the judgments of the circuit court are correct, and the same are affirmed.

United States v. Amor, 68 F. 885, 16 C.C.A. 60, 1895 U.S. App. LEXIS 2922 (5th Cir. 1895).

Pincite

68 F. 885 (United States v. Amor) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related