108 U.S. 552 - Ex parte Hung Hang — 108 U.S. 552

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 1987

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

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.

¶1ORIGINAL.

¶2Habeas Corpus — Jurisdiction.

¶3Except in cases afEeoting ambassadors, other public ministers, or consuls, or those in which a State is a party, the supreme court can only issue a writ of habeas corpus under its appellate jurisdiction.

¶4Application for a writ of habeas corpus.

¶5Mr. Solicitor-General, Mr. Assistant Attorney-General Simons and Mr. Hall McAllister for the petitioner.

¶6Mr. Chief Justice Waite

¶7delivered the opinion of the court.

¶8This is an application for a writ of habeas corpus for the purpose of an inquiry into the legality of the detention of the petitioner, Hung Nang, a subject of the Emperor of China, by *553the chief of police, -under a warrant for his arrest, issued by the police judge of the city and county of San Francisco, California, for a violation of an order or ordinance of the board of supervisors of such city and county, alleged to be in contrar vention of the Constitution and of a treaty of the United States.

¶9It has long been settled that ordinarily this court cannot issue a writ of habeas corpus except under its appellate jurisdiction, Ex parte Bollmam, & Swartwout, 4 Cranch, 75; Ex parte Watkins, 7 Pet. 568; Ex parte Yerger, 8 Wall. 85; Ex parte Lange, 18 Wall. 163; Ex parte Parks, 93 U. S. 18; Ex parte Virginia, 100 U. S. 339; Ex parte Siebold, Ib. 371.

¶10Section 751 of the Kevised Statutes, which reenacts a'similar provision in the judiciary act of 1789 (sec. 14), gives this court authority to issue the writ, but except in cases 'affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, or consuls, and those in which a State is a party, it can only be done for a review of the judicial decision of some inferior officer or court. This petition presents no such case.

¶11The writ is emsequentl/y denied.