United States v. Johnston
District Court, W.D. Washington
1Opinion of the CourtNeterer, District Judge
(after stating the facts as above). It is settled by the Supreme Court that the order of removal is a judicial act, and that the prima facie case made by the indictment and proof of identity may be overcome by testimony, that the burden to overcome such prima facie case is on the defendant, and that a defendant is entitled to the judgment of the court from which removal is sought as to the existence of probable cause upon the testimony presented. Tinsley v. Treat, 205 U. S. 20, 27 Sup. Ct. 430, 51 L. Ed. 689; U. S. v. Morse (D. C.) 287 Fed. 906. In Tinsley v. Treat, supra, the court quoted…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Haas v. HenkelSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
- Munsey v. CloughSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Stacey v. EmerySupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Beavers v. HenkelSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Hogan v. O'NEILLSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Reis v. United States MarshalDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1961
- Tacoma Ass'n of Credit Men v. LesterWashington Supreme Court · 1967
- United States v. BarrDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1985
- Parker v. McDermittDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1938
- United States ex rel. Costello v. McDermittDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1937
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.