Danziger v. Clark

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided March 20, 1950.

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1950-03-20

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently March 1950

1 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1950-03-20

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1A. Brigham Rose, Los Angeles, Cal., for appellant.

¶2Ernest A. Tolin, U. S. Atty., Norman W. Neukom and Jack E. Hildreth, Asst. U. S. Attys., Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee.

¶3Before DENMAN, Chief Judge, and STEPHENS and ORR, Circuit Judges.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5Appellee in this appeal in a habeas corpus proceeding moves to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the appellant is no longer in the custody of the appellee.

¶6The affidavit offered on behalf of the appellee states that the sentence, claimed in the application for the writ of habeas corpus to have been illegally imposed, has been ■fully served and appellant’s counsel at the hearing asserted that his client was not in the custody of the appellee.

¶7The motion to dismiss the appeal is granted.