Legal Opinion
United States Ex Rel. Karamian v. Curran
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided January 10, 1927No. 140PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHough, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). The matter at bar is singular, because a writ of habeas corpus primarily inquires into the legality of a relator’s detention or imprisonment, and we here start with an admission that Karamian’s present deprivation of liberty is entirely lawful. This results from his own story, as above summarized; and counsel admits that he must be deported — i. e., sent out of the United States somewhere. The only purpose of the writ is to ascertain where he must or may go, and how he shall get there.
The direction below was that he “be permitted voluntarily to return to…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Lewis v. FrickSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- United States ex rel. Moore v. SissonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1913
- United States ex rel. Ueberall v. WilliamsDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1911
- United States v. RuizCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1913
- United States ex rel. Hen Lee v. SissonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1916
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Blumen v. HaffCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1935
- United States ex rel. Ling Yee Suey v. SparCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1945
- Klapholz v. EsperdyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1961
- United States Ex Rel. Mazur v. Commissioner of ImmigrationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1939
- Fafalios v. DoakCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1931
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.