De Groot v. United States

Harry De Groot, having been convicted of murder in the first degree in the District Court of the United States for the District of Alaska, Division 1, asks leave to prosecute his appeal in forma pauperis. He bases his application on the ground that his attorney failed to exercise due diligence in prosecuting settlement of the bill of exceptions to be used on the appeal. It appears from the application that the time for the settlement of the bill of exceptions and the term in which such bill should be settled had expired.- The only allegation of the petitioner, who presents his petition in propria personam, is as follows: “That the court exceeded its jurisdiction, the rules of evidence, and was arbitrarily prejudiced, in all these particulars beyond those ex *883 tremes denounced by the Honorable Judge Denman, and concurred in unanimously by this Honorable Court, in the opinion reversing the judgment of the original trial.”

The appellant also avers: “That the material evidence offered at the second trial did not differ in any major particular from the evidence presented at the first trial and deemed insufficient by this Honorable Court to support the verdict of guilty of murder in…