Riggins v. United States
Supreme Court of the United States
APPEAL PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT'OP THE UNITED STATES POR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OP ALÁBAMA. Riggins and Powell were indicted under §§ 5508, 5509, Revised Statutes, in the District Court for the Northern Division of the Northern District of Alabama) at the October Term, 1904, thereof; and on the twenty-fourth day of October, 1904, the indictment was remitted to the next session of the Circuit Court in and for that Division and District by order of the Circuit Court, the District…
Read the full summary
APPEAL PROM THE CIRCUIT COURT'OP THE UNITED STATES POR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OP ALÁBAMA. Riggins and Powell were indicted under §§ 5508, 5509, Revised Statutes, in the District Court for the Northern Division of the Northern District of Alabama) at the October Term, 1904, thereof; and on the twenty-fourth day of October, 1904, the indictment was remitted to the next session of the Circuit Court in and for that Division and District by order of the Circuit Court, the District Judge presiding. A capias was issued to take Riggins into custody to answer the indictment, October 26, 1904. On the…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Fuller
It is settled, that tt^e writ of habeas corpus will not issue unless the court under whose warrant1 petitioner'is held is without jurisdiction, and that it. cannot be used merely to correct errors. Ordinarily the writ will not be granted when there is a remedy by writ of error or appeal, yet in rare and exceptional cases it may be issued, although such remedy exists.
In New York v. Eno, 155 U. S. 89, it was held that Congress intended to invest the’ courts of the Union and the justices and judges thereof with power upon writ of habeas corpus to restore to liberty any person within their…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Ex Parte RoyallSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- New York v. EnoSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- In Re ChapmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- In Re LancasterSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Ex Parte RoyallSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by112 opinions
- Salinger v. LoiselSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Ex Parte HudgingsSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Anthony R. Martin-Trigona v. Alan ShiffCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1983
- In Re BellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- United States Ex Rel. Kennedy v. TylerSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
107 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.