Erickson v. Hodges
Citations
- 179 F. 177
- 102 C.C.A. 443
- 1910 U.S. App. LEXIS 4624
Syllabus
<p>1. Habeas Corpus (§ 62*) — Procedure—Dismissal of Petition.</p> <p>Under Rev. St. § 755 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 593), which provides that on an application to a federal court for a writ of habeas corpus the court or judge shall fórthwith award a writ, “unless it appears from the petition itself that the party is not entitled thereto,” where it appears^ from the petition that the case is not one which would justify the exercise of federal authority, it may he dismissed, and the court is not required to either award a writ or issue an order to the respondent to show cause.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Habeas Corpus, Cent. Dig. § 55; Dec. Dig. § 62.*]</p> <p>2. Habeas Corpus (§45*) — Hearing in Federal Court — Matters Concluded by Determination of State Court.</p> <p>In a criminal prosecution in a state court, where the statute creating the offense is not repugnant to the federal Constitution, and the court has jurisdiction, its determination with respect to the sufficiency of the charge is controlling in the federal courts on an application by the accused for a writ of habeas corpus after conviction.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Habeas Corpus, Cent. Dig. §§ 38^t5; Dec. Dig. § 45;* Courts, Cent. Dig. §§ 1376-1385.]</p> <p>Jurisdiction of federal courts in habeas corpus proceedings, see note to In re Huse, 25 C. O. A. 4.]</p> <p>3. Habeas Corpus (§45*) — Hearing in Federal Court — Matters Concluded by Determination of State Court.</p> <p>The determination by the highest court of a state that the offense charged in an indictment is one punishable under the laws of the state is conclusive in a subsequent proceeding by the accused in a federal court for release on a writ of habeas co.rpus.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Habeas Corpus, Cent. Dig. §§ 38-4»; Dec. Dig. § 45;* Courts, Cent. Dig. §§ 1376-1385.]</p> <p>4. Statutes (§§ 118, 138*) — Formal Requisites — Constitutional Provisions.</p> <p>Daws Wash. 1891, c. 28, § 1 (Ballinger’s
Judges: Wolverton
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
7 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Murdock v. PollockEighth Circuit· 1915-12-03· cited 18×
- Kelly v. JohnstonNinth Circuit· 1940-04-30· cited 12×
- Cohen v. BiddleEighth Circuit· 1926-04-19· cited 7×
- Hom Moon Ong v. NagleNinth Circuit· 1929-04-29· cited 7×
- Sander v. JohnstonNinth Circuit· 1926-03-01· cited 6×
- Johnston v. McDonaldNinth Circuit· 1946-08-30· cited 4×
- Hawk v. HollowellS.D. Iowa· 1932-11-24· cited 1×
Cites
11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- In Re BurrusSupreme Court· 1890-05-19· cited 717×
- Ex Parte YarbroughSupreme Court· 1884-03-03· cited 548×
- Ex Parte MilliganSupreme Court· 1867-01-22· cited 531×
- Kohl v. LehlbackSupreme Court· 1895-12-23· cited 129×
- Caldwell v. TexasSupreme Court· 1891-01-12· cited 91×
- Bergemann v. BackerSupreme Court· 1895-04-01· cited 62×
- Harland v. TerritoryWashington Territory· 1887-02-03· cited 31×
- State v. HalbertWashington Supreme Court· 1896-03-21· cited 10×
- State v. MessnerWashington Supreme Court· 1906-07-24· cited 6×
- In re LewisUnited States Circuit Court for the Northern District of Florida· 1902-04-12· cited 6×
- State v. EricksonWashington Supreme Court· 1909-08-25· cited 4×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.