Tatum v. United States
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
HOOD, Associate Judge.
This is an appeal from a conviction of petit larceny. Appellant was sentenced to serve ninety days and at argument before us it was conceded that appellant had served his sentence. We accordingly raised the question whether the case was moot. In Hill v. United States, D.C.Mun.App., 75 A.2d 138, we followed the ruling in St. Pierre v. United States, 319 U.S. 41, 42, 63 S.Ct. 910, 911, 87 L.Ed. 1199, where it was said: “We are of opinion that the case is moot because, after petitioner’s service of his sentence and its expiration, there was no longer a subject matter on…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Fiswick v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- St. Pierre v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Edwards v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1943
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Carman. Carman v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1951
- Hooton v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1908
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. JacksonMontana Supreme Court · 1979
- McQuaid v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1952
- State v. Van TasselCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1971
- State v. SloanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1977
- O'BRIEN v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 1972
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.