United States v. Lawrence, (1795)
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Number:
Visitors: 16
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
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 appreh..
More
3 U.S. 42 (____)
3 Dall. 42
The UNITED STATES
versus
Judge LAWRENCE.
Supreme Court of United States.
The Attorney General, in reply, premised, that the Executive of the United States had no inclination to press upon the Court.
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 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
