From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Comerford v. Hogsett

Circuit Court of Appeals, First Circuit
Oct 16, 1935
79 F.2d 486 (1st Cir. 1935)

Opinion

No. 3028.

October 16, 1935.

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of Massachusetts; Hugh D. McLellan, Judge.

Habeas corpus proceeding by John G. Comerford against James L. Hogsett. From an order dismissing petition for writ of habeas corpus, the petitioner appeals.

Appeal dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

John G. Comerford, pro. se.

James J. Bacigalupo, Asst. Atty. Gen. (Paul A. Dever, Atty. Gen., on the brief), for appellee.

Before BINGHAM and MORTON, Circuit Judges, and MORRIS, District Judge.


This is an appeal to this court from an order of the federal District Court for Massachusetts of December 3, 1934, dismissing the appellant's petition for a writ of habeas corpus. It appears that the appellant is confined in the state prison at Charlestown, Mass., serving a sentence, and is there held under process of the state court. The appeal is not accompanied by a certificate of probable cause as now required to give this court jurisdiction to entertain such an appeal. USCA, title 28, § 466 ( 43 Stat. 940, § 6(d), Act of March 10, 1908, c. 76 ( 35 Stat. 40). In this situation the appeal must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See 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; In re Graves (C.C.A.) 270 F. 181, 187.

The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.


Summaries of

Comerford v. Hogsett

Circuit Court of Appeals, First Circuit
Oct 16, 1935
79 F.2d 486 (1st Cir. 1935)
Case details for

Comerford v. Hogsett

Case Details

Full title:COMERFORD v. HOGSETT

Court:Circuit Court of Appeals, First Circuit

Date published: Oct 16, 1935

Citations

79 F.2d 486 (1st Cir. 1935)

Citing Cases

Wilson v. Lanagan

USCA, title 28, § 466 ( 43 Stat. 940, § 6(d), Act March 10, 1908, c. 76 ( 35 Stat. 40). See Bilik v.…

Schenk v. Plummer

Here, there is no certificate of probable cause. Hence, we have no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.…