Legal Opinion
Crockett v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided January 20, 1942No. 9894PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DENMAN, Circuit Judge.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the district court denying a motion entitled “The Petitioner’s Verified Motion for Correction of Sentence.” The pleading is inartificially drawn. Among its prayers it asks as in habeas corpus “that he be forthwith brought before this Honorable Court.” In effect, it seeks a habeas corpus proceeding in which petitioner presents issues which also would be considered under a writ coram nobis. See Robinson v. Johnston, 9 Cir., 118 F.2d 998. “A petition for a writ of habeas corpus ought not to be scrutinized with technical nicety. Even if…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Smith v. O'GRADYSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Holiday v. JohnstonSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Robinson v. JohnstonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1941
- State Ex Rel. Orr v. LatshawSupreme Court of Missouri · 1922
- Fogus v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1929
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Bozel v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1943
- United States ex rel. Robinson v. JohnstonSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Leishman v. Associated Wholesale Electric Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1942
- Sisquoc Ranch Co. v. RothCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1946
- Western Pac R.R. Corp. v. Western Pac. R. Co. Metzger v. Western Pac. R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1952
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.