Ireland v. Woods

Citations

• 246 U.S. 323
• 38 S. Ct. 319
• 62 L. Ed. 745
• 1918 U.S. LEXIS 1551

Syllabus

<p>The jurisdiction to review a state court judgment by writ of error, under Jud. Code, § 237, as amended, is confined -to cases in which the validity of a treaty or statute of, or authority exercised under, the United States was drawn in question, and the decision was against the validity; and those in which the validity of a statute of, or an authority exercised under, a State was drawn in question, on the ground of repugnancy to the Constitution, treaties or' laws of the United States, and the decision was in favor of the validity.</p> <p>When, however, the state court’s judgment upholds the federal treaty, . statute or authority, against the claim of invalidity, or. denies the validity of the state statute or authority upon an attack based on federal grounds, or when the basis of this court’s jurisdiction is a claim of federal title, right, privilege or immunity, decided for or against the party claiming, review can be had only by certiorari.</p> <p>The writ of error-is allowed as of right, in the cases designated therefor by the statute, when the federal question presented is real and substantial, and an open one in this court; but certiorari is granted or refused by this court in the exercise of its discretion. Philadelphia & Reading Goal & Iron Co. v. Gilbert, 245 U. S. 162.</p> <p>The foregoing limitations apply in habeas corpus cases as in others sought to be reviewed under Jud. Code, § 237.</p> <p>Where a person held for interstate rendition obtained habeas corpus upon the ground that he was not a fugitive from justice, basing the contention on a construction of the indictment as' to the time of the ‘ offense charged and on his view of evidence offered by him touching the time of his presence in the demanding State and his opportunity to commit the offense, held, that the contention did not draw in question the validity of the authority exercised under the arresting State by its governor in issuing his warrant and .in holding the petitioner for removal, bu