Legal Opinion

United States Ex Rel. Innes v. Crystal

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided January 4, 1943No. 136PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FRANK, Circuit Judge.

Appellant, a soldier in the military service of the United States, was convicted of criminal charges by a court-martial of the United States Army, and sought habeas corpus because of alleged errors committed by the court-martial.

The authorities generally are to the effect that the civil courts cannot consider errors at a court-martial except those that affect the jurisdiction of the court-martial or the fixing of a penalty beyond its statutory powers. 1 2None of the alleged errors here goes to that extent. Thus one of the alleged errors was that counsel assigned to…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Adams v. United States Ex Rel. McCannSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  2. In Re GrimleySupreme Court of the United States · 1890
  3. Swaim v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  4. Mullan v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1909
  5. Ex parte DickeyDistrict Court, D. Maine · 1913

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. United States Ex Rel. Innes v. HiattCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1944
  2. Burns v. Lovett, Secretary of Defense Dennis v. Lovett, Secretary of DefenseCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1952
  3. Innes v. HiattDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1944
  4. Ex Parte BentonDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1945
  5. Henry v. HodgesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1948

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API