Ex parte Betz
Ex parte Betz Ex parte Durant Ex parte Wills Ex parte Cutino Ex parte Walczak Ex parte McKinley and Ex parte Murphy
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
The motions for leave to file petitions for writs of habeas corpus are denied for want of original jurisdiction.
Mr. Justice Black and Mr. Justice Rutledge are of the opinion that, as in Ex parte Hawk, 321 U. S. 114 (see also White v. Ragen, 324 U. S. 760, 765 ) where this Court declined to entertain an application for relief by habeas corpus, the petitions for habeas corpus should be denied without prejudice to their being filed in the appropriate District Court. See Ex parte Endo, 323 U. S. 283, 304-306 . Mr. Justice Murphy is of the view that these petitions raise questions as to jurisdiction and proper procedure which should be heard and determined by this Court. Mr. Justice Jackson took no part in the consideration or decision of the application in No. 19, Miscellaneous.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 14 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.