Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

179 F.2d 963

Docket No. 12380.

Murray v. Wedemeyer

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided Jan. 20, 1950.

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1950-01-20

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently October 1956

5 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on Bledsoe v. Johnston

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1950-01-20

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1James T. Davis, San Francisco, Cal., for appellant.

¶2Frank J. Hennessy, U. S. Attorney, Joseph Karesh, Asst. U. S. Attorney, San Francisco, Cal., for appellee.

¶3Before HEALY, McALLISTER,* and ORR, Circuit Judges.

¶5PER CURIAM.

¶6This is an appeal from a judgment denying a writ of habeas corpus. The appellee has moved for a. dismissal of the appeal on the ground that during its pendency appellant filed an application for parole, that the application was granted, and that appellant is no longer in the physical custody of appellee or any of his aides or representatives.

¶7It appears that the facts are as stated in the motion. While the situation differs somewhat from that disclosed in Bledsoe v. Johnston, 9 Cir., 164 F.2d 481, we think the principle there applied is nevertheless applicable. The appeal is accordingly dismissed on the authority of that decision.

/179/f2d/963 · .json · Public domain