Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Lawrence, (1795)

Court: Supreme Court of the United States Number:  Visitors: 8
Filed: Mar. 03, 1795
Latest Update: Mar. 01, 2020
Summary: 3 U.S. 42 (_) 3 Dall. 42 The UNITED STATES versus Judge LAWRENCE. Supreme Court of United States. *48 The Attorney General, in reply, premised, that the Executive of the United States had no inclination to press upon the Court. *53 BY THE COURT: We are clearly and unanimously of opinion, that a mandamus ought not to issue. It is evident, that the District Judge was acting in a judicial capacity, when he determined, that the evidence was not sufficient to authorize his issuing a warrant for appre
More
3 U.S. 42 (____)
3 Dall. 42

The UNITED STATES
versus
Judge LAWRENCE.

Supreme Court of United States.

*48 The Attorney General, in reply, premised, that the Executive of the United States had no inclination to press upon the Court.

*53 BY THE COURT:

We are clearly and unanimously of opinion, that a mandamus ought not to issue. It is evident, that the District Judge was acting in a judicial capacity, when he determined, that the evidence was not sufficient to authorize his issuing a warrant for apprehending Captain Barre: and (whatever might be the difference of sentiment entertained by this Court) we have no power to compel a Judge to decide according to the dictates of any judgment, but his own. It is *54 unnecessary, however, to declare, or to form, at this time, any conclusive opinion, on the question which has been so much agitated, respecting the evidence required by the 9th article of the Consular Convention.

The Rule discharged.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer