Crowley v. United States
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF PORTO RICO. The plaintiff in error was indicted in the District Court of the United States for the District of Porto Rico as constituted by the act of Congress of April 12, 1900, entitled “An act temporarily to provide revenues- and a civil government for Porto Rico, and for other purposes.” 31 Stat. 77, c. 191. The indictment was based upon certain sections of the Revised Statutes of the United States…
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF PORTO RICO. The plaintiff in error was indicted in the District Court of the United States for the District of Porto Rico as constituted by the act of Congress of April 12, 1900, entitled “An act temporarily to provide revenues- and a civil government for Porto Rico, and for other purposes.” 31 Stat. 77, c. 191. The indictment was based upon certain sections of the Revised Statutes of the United States relating to crimes committed by persons employed in the postal service. Rev. Stat. §§ 5467, 5468 and 5469. The punishment…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Harlan
The first question is one of the jurisdiction of this court; the Govérnment insisting that, under existing statutes, we are without authority to review the judgment in this case.
By the thirty-fifth section of the Foraker act of April 12, 1900, 31 Stat. 85, c. 191, it is provided, among other things, that writs of error and. appeals to this court from the final decisions of the District Courts of the'United States shall be. allowed in all cases where “an act of Congress is brought in question and the right claimed thereunder is denied.” In this case that act was brought in question by the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1831
- McQuillen v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1872
- Vanhook v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 1854
- State v. HerndonIndiana Supreme Court · 1839
- State v. FreemanIndiana Supreme Court · 1842
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by63 opinions
- Roche v. Evaporated Milk Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Armando A. Miranda v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1958
- United States v. GoldDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1979
- United States v. David Ransom HeathCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1958
- Romeu v. ToddSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
58 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.