EX PARTE PATRICK

Citator

Cited By (16 total)

• Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134 (U.S. 2012)
  …l restriction must be contained in the very same paragraph as the procedural requirement, there is no doubt that under this statute a judge’s certification that there was probable cause for an appeal was jurisdictional. See, e. g., Ex parte Patrick, 212 U. S. 555 (1908) (per cu-riam); Bilik v. Strassheim, 212 U. S. 551 (1908) (per cu-riam). There is no reason whatever to think that Congress rendered the statement of opinion unnecessary for jurisdiction by (1) extending the requirement for it to §2255 proceed…
• Hohn v. United States, 524 U.S. 236 (U.S. 1998)
  …,1925, ch. 229, §§ 6(d), 13, 43 Stat. 940, 942. Before 1925, this Court readily concluded it had no jurisdiction over appeals brought before it in the absence of a certificate, see, e. g., Bilik v. Strassheim, 212 U. S. 551 (1908); Ex parte Patrick, 212 U. S. 555 (1908), and House interpreted the 1925 amendment to produce the same effect in the courts of appeals and, consequently, in this Court under the predecessor to § 1254(1). Quite obviously, with House on the books — neither overruled nor even cited i…
• United States ex rel. Kreuter v. Baldwin, 49 F.2d 262 (7th Cir. 1931)
  …ndered in the District Court. It is equally clear that appellant could not appeal without an accompanying certificate of probable cause signed by the District Judge. Bilik v. Strassheim, 212 U. S. 551, 29 S. Ct. 684, 53 L. Ed. 649; Ex parte Patrick, 212 U. S. 555, 29 S. Ct. 686, 53 L. Ed. 650; Genna v. Frazier (C. C. A.) 24 F. (2d) 706. There having been no certificate of probable cause entered by the District Court during the time within which appellant might appeal, and this court being without authority t…