Jim Pennywell v. Honorable J. L. McCarrey Jr.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
HAMLEY, Circuit Judge.
This matter is before us on our order to show cause why a writ of prohibition and a writ of mandamus should not issue, and upon respondent’s return thereto.
The petitioner, Jim Pennywell, is presently in danger of being apprehended and imprisoned under a bench warrant authorized to be issued by the District Court for the District of Alaska, Third Division. Asserting that the named district court is without jurisdiction in the matter, Pennywell seeks in this proceeding to prohibit respondent, Honorable J. L. McCarrey, Jr., judge of that court, from the further exercise of…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Hanback v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1943
- Tropp v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1920
- Gillen v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1952
- Reed v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1953
- City of Seldovia v. LundDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 1956
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- State v. ConleyTennessee Supreme Court · 1982
- Metropolitan Government of Nashville & Davidson County v. MilesTennessee Supreme Court · 1975
- Government of the Virgin Islands v. Felipe FerrerCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1960
- Clinton B. Howard v. United States of America, Domenic N. Mastrippolito v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1968
- Metropolitan Government of Nashville & Davidson County v. MilesTennessee Supreme Court · 1975