¶1Criminal law @=»| 131 (4) — Writ of error, manifestly brought only for delay, will be promptly dismissed, if brought to attention of court.
¶2.' Proceeding in error on frivolous grounds, perfected after long and unnecessary delay, will be promptly dismissed, if called to attention of court by district attorney.
¶3In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Northern Division of the Eastern District of Michigan; Arthur J. Tuttle, Judge.
¶4William Alberts was convicted of an offense, and he brings error.
¶5Writ dismissed.
¶6Charles A. Higgs, of Bay City, Mich., for plaintiff in error.
¶7Donald B. Frederick, Asst. U. S. Atty., of Detroit, Mich.
¶8Before DENISON and MOORMAN, Circuit Judges, and RAYMOND, District Judge.
¶10It appearing upon final hearing that the errors assigned are plainly frivolous, the writ of error will be dismissed; mandate will issue forthwith.
¶11The case furnishes an illustration of delays which should not occur. Motion for a new trial was .denied August 13, 1926. A bill of exceptions, covering 38 printed pages, could well have been settled in a few days; but it was not done until March 19,1927. In such a case the court may well refuse to permit so much delay, even if there is consent by the district attorney, in whose office all matters which postpone execution of a sentence should, in our judgment, be given precedence over most, if not all, other business. If a review proceeding, so devoid of merit as this one, when docketed here, is brought to our notice by the district attorney, final disposition will be prompt.