HARRIS
v.
ELLIS

5th Cir. | 1952-02-15
No. 13755
Before BORAH, RUSSELL, and RIVES, Circuit Judges.
194 F.2d 604 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (1952) Positive Treatment
Cited by 14 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction because a certificate of probable cause was not presented, which is a prerequisite for appeals in habeas corpus proceedings arising from state court detentions.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant sought habeas corpus relief from a federal court regarding state court detention. The district judge denied the petition and refused to issu…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is from a final order by a court of the United States in a habeas corpus proceeding where the detention complained of arises out of process issued by a State Court. Under the provisions of Section 2253, Title 28 U.S.C., a certificate of probable cause is a jurisdictional prerequisite to such an appeal. The appellant does not present such certificate but, on the contrary, there appears in the record an order of the district judge denying such certificate.

The record standing thus, and the judges of this court, after an examination of the record, being of the opinion that the dis trict court rightly denied the petition1 and that upon the authority of Ex parte Hawk, 321 U.S. 114, 116, 117, 64 S.Ct. 448, 88 L.Ed. 572; White v. Ragen, 324 U.S. 760, 764, 65 S.Ct. 978, 89 L.Ed. 1348; Darr v. Burford, 339 U.S. 200, 203, 204, 70 S.Ct. 587, 94 L.Ed. 761, there exists no probable cause for an appeal, and declining to issue such certificate, the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

. In denying the petition the district court assigned as grounds for its decision:

“a. Such petition does not show that petitioner is held in custody of the Statute Authorities in violation of the Constitution, laws, or treaties, of the United States.

“b. Such petition does not show that petitioner has exhausted his remedies in the State Court, nor does it show an extraordinary condition which would permit or require this court to take jurisdiction in the absence of his exhausting his remedies in the State Court. See Darr v. Burford, U.S. — [339 U.S. 200, 70 S.Ct. 587, 94 L.Ed. 761].”


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw