United States v. Ferdinand C. Canda, 257 (1882)
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Number: 257
Visitors: 8
Filed: Apr. 10, 1882
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: 154 U.S. 674 14 S. Ct. 1211 26 L. Ed. 1069 UNITED STATES v. FERDINAND C. CANDA et al. No. 257. April 10, 1882. The Attorney General and the Solicitor General, for the United States. Mr. Chief Justice WAITE delivered the opinion of the court. 1 This case comes here on a certificate of division as to questions arising on a motion to quash an information, and must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction, on the authority of U. S. v. Rosenburgh. 7 Wall. 580 , and U. S. v. Avery, 13 Wall. 251 . It is c
Summary: 154 U.S. 674 14 S. Ct. 1211 26 L. Ed. 1069 UNITED STATES v. FERDINAND C. CANDA et al. No. 257. April 10, 1882. The Attorney General and the Solicitor General, for the United States. Mr. Chief Justice WAITE delivered the opinion of the court. 1 This case comes here on a certificate of division as to questions arising on a motion to quash an information, and must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction, on the authority of U. S. v. Rosenburgh. 7 Wall. 580 , and U. S. v. Avery, 13 Wall. 251 . It is co..
More
154 U.S. 674
14 S. Ct. 1211
26 L. Ed. 1069
UNITED STATES
v.
FERDINAND C. CANDA et al.
No. 257.
April 10, 1882.
The Attorney General and the Solicitor General, for the United States.
Mr. Chief Justice WAITE delivered the opinion of the court.
1
This case comes here on a certificate of division as to questions arising on a motion to quash an information, and must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction, on the authority of U. S. v. Rosenburgh. 7 Wall. 580, and U. S. v. Avery, 13 Wall. 251. It is consequently so ordered.
Source: CourtListener
