In re Anderson

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided Feb. 5, 1941.

Rehearing Denied March 25, 1941.

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1941-02-05

2 counsel of record

Relies on Henry Urquhart v. Thomas Brown · Ferguson v. Swope · O'Brien v. Swope

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1941-02-05

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently January 1971

7 federal appellate ·

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Ernest J. Anderson, in pro per.

¶2No other appearance entered.

¶3Before WILBUR, GARRECHT. and MATHEWS, Circuit Judges.

¶4 *940PER CURIAM.

¶5Application for leave to file petition for writ of habeas corpus in forma pauperis in this court is denied because without merit for two reasons: One, our power as a court to issue such writs is in aid of our appellate jurisdiction only. De Maurez v. Swope, 100 F.2d 530; Ferguson v. Swope, 9 Cir., 109 F.2d 152; De Maurez v. Swope, 9 Cir., 110 F.2d 564. Two, the lower federal courts should not consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus where the petitioner is detained under state process save in exceptional cases. Urquhart v. Brown, 205 U.S. 179, 27 S.Ct. 459, 51 L.Ed. 760; Ex parte Melendez, 9 Cir., 98 F.2d.791; Ex parte Penney, 9 Cir., 103 F.2d 27; Ex parte Jefferson, 9 Cir., 106 F.2d 471.

¶6This is not such a case.

¶7Application denied.