CARR, DIRECTOR OF IMMIGRATION,
v.
ZAJA
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.
Zaja, a Yugoslavian seaman who deserted his ship in California in 1925 and was arrested for deportation more than three years later, challenged his deportation order through habeas corpus proceedings. The Supreme Court reversed the Circuit Court of Appeals' decision ordering his discharge, applying the same legal reasoning it used in a companion case, and held that the Court retained jurisdiction despite the appeals court's mandate having already been issued to the lower court.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Justice Holmes delivered the opinion of the Court.
This case raises the same question as No. 92, ante, p. 48, but, as stated in No. 92, was decided the other way by the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Zaja is a Dalmatian, citizen of Jugo-Slavia. He shipped as a seaman upon an Italian ship and on its arrival at San Pedro, California, deserted the ship on January 25, 1925. He was arrested on October 4, 1928, more than three years after his entry, and after a hearing was ordered to be deported on the same ground as in No. 92. He obtained a writ of habeas corpus and was ordered to be discharged from custody. 37 F. (2d) 1016. The judgment must be reversed for the reasons given in No. 92. It is objected that the mandate of the Circuit Court of Appeals was not stayed, but was issued to the District Court and spread upon its records and that therefore the case is finished. But that does not defeat the jurisdiction of this Court. The Conqueror, 166 U. S. 110, 113. Louisville & Nashville R. Co. v. Behlmer, 169 U. S. 644, 648. Rule 45.
Judgment reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Villamonte-Marquez, 462 U.S. 579 (U.S. 1983)…The fact that the Government did not obtain a stay, thus permitting issuance of the mandate of the Court of Appeals, would not change the effect of our reversal. See Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Flowers, 330 U. S. 464, 467 (1947); Carr v. Zaja, 283 U. S. 52 (1931). Under our reasoning in Mancusi v. Stubbs, 408 U. S. 204, 205-207 (1972), the absence of an indictment does not require a contrary conclusion. Further, it is settled law that the preliminary steps in a criminal proceeding are “merged” into…
-
Eagles v. United States ex rel. Samuels, 329 U.S. 304 (U.S. 1946)…. 258, 158 N. E. 613,2 by providing that a prisoner to whom the writ has been granted may, pending appeal, be enlarged on a recognizance. Rule 45. The fact that he has been so enlarged does not render the appeal of the custodian moot. Carr v. Zaja, 283 U. S. 52, 53.3 In such a case the release is obtained through the assertion of judicial power. It is the propriety of the exercise of that power which is in issue in the appellate court, whether the prisoner is discharged or remanded to custody. Though the w…
-
Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Flowers, 330 U.S. 464 (U.S. 1947)…hority to review an action of the Circuit Court of Appeals, directing a remand to a state court. Gay v. Ruff, 292 U. S. 25. Nor does the fact that the mandate of the Circuit Court of Appeals has issued defeat this Court’s jurisdiction. Carr v. Zaja, 283 U. S. 52, and cases cited. Second. We think that the jurisdictional amount of $3,000 was involved in this suit. The contrary conclusion of the Circuit Court of Appeals was based on the nature of the award under the Tennessee statute. The award may be paid i…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- The Conqueror, 166 U.S. 110 (U.S. 1897)
- Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co. v. Behlmer, 169 U.S. 644 (U.S. 1898)
- Roscoe C. Zuckerman v. Hood, 37 F.2d 1016 (9th Cir. 1930)