Grigg

Grigg v. Bolton

Good Law
53 F.2d 158·1931 U.S. App. LEXIS 2633
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 2, 1931No. 6491California1,981 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

James, J.

Appellant, a resident of the city of Butte, Mont., was charged in an indictment, found by the grand jury for the district of Idaho, with having conspired with certain persons *159 named and others declared to he unknown to the grand jurors to violate provisions of the Harrison Narcotic Act (section 2 [26 USCA § 696]). His removal was sought from the district of Montana. An order for such removal having been made by the United States Commissioner in Montana, he brought his petition for habeas corpus before the United States District Judge in that district, who reviewed the record made before the committing officer. From an order remanding the petitioner to the custody of the marshal, this appeal is taken.

Two contentions are presented here: (1) That the indictment returned in the district of Idaho did not show that a crime was committed within the jurisdiction of the United States court sitting in that district. (2) That in the proceedings before the Commissioner, which were reviewed by the district judge on the writ, probable cause for the finding of the indictment was not established.

That portion of the indictment, pertinent to be considered under the first point, is now…

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.