Tate

Tate v. People of the State of California

Good Law
187 F.2d 98
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 14, 195112711_1California544 words

Opinion

Opinion

The appellant sought to file a petition for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus. The court denied the right to file such a petition in forma pauperis. Since the record before does not show appellant made “affidavit that he is unable to pay such costs or give security therefor” as required by the statute, 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915 , it was proper to deny the right to file on this ground alone. The court held that the petition should be denied filing because no “exceptional circumstances of peculiar urgency,” required the issuance of the writ to free petitioner from custody on a conviction affirmed by the appellate courts of the State. See Huffman v. Smith, 9 Cir., 172 F.2d 129 . Later, the judge signed a certificate of probable cause in order to permit appeal.

The waste of judicial time in dealing with efforts of this habitual offender against law to break from confinement, which the courts have found necessary in order to protect innocent members of society from his crimes, are set out below.

1-4-46, People v. Tate, 72 Cal.App.2d 467 , 164 P.2d 556 ; 1-14-46, People v. Tate, 72 Cal.App.2d 472 , 164 P.2d 556 ; 4-3-47, People v. Tate, 78 Cal.App.2d 894 , 178 P.2d 470 ; 4-14—47, People v.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.