Smith Vs. United States

Smith vs United States

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided 1876

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/83083

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/83083
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: 1876
Case Number: 94 U.S. 97
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Smith

Respondent

United States

Excerpt

.....here. mr. chief justice waite delivered the opinion of the court. it is clearly within our discretion to refuse to hear a criminal case in error, unless the convicted party, suing out the writ, is where he can be made to respond to any judgment we may render. in this case it is admitted that the plaintiff in error has escaped, and is not within the control of the court below, either actually, by being in custody, or constructively, by being out on bail. if we affirm the judgment, he is not likely to appear to submit to his sentence. if we reverse it and order a new trial, he will appear or not, as he may consider most for his interest. under such circumstances, we are not inclined to hear and decide what may prove to be only a moot case. this cause was docketed here dec. 29, 1870. in due time a brief was filed on behalf of the plaintiff in error, and the cause has been regularly continued at every term since, no one appearing here in person to represent the plaintiff. at this term we dismissed the writ, on motion of the united states, for want of prosecution, but have since reinstated it on motion of the counsel for the plaintiff in error, who now moves to have it set down for argument. this motion we deny, and order page 94 u. s. 98 that unless the plaintiff in error submit himself to the jurisdiction of the court below on or before the first day of our next term, the cause be left off the docket after that time. people v. genet, 59 n.y. 80; leftwich's case, 20 gratt. 723; commonwealth v. andrews, 97 mass. 544; see also 31 me. 592. motion to set down the case for argument denied.

Full Judgment

Smith v. United States - 94 U.S. 97 (1876)
U.S. Supreme Court Smith v. United States, 94 U.S. 97 (1876)

Smith v. United States

94 U.S. 97

ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT

OF WASHINGTON TERRITORY

SYLLABUS

This Court will refuse to hear a criminal case unless the convicted party suing out the writ of error is where he can be made to respond to any judgment which may be rendered here.

Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court.

It is clearly within our discretion to refuse to hear a criminal case in error, unless the convicted party, suing out the writ, is where he can be made to respond to any judgment we may render. In this case it is admitted that the plaintiff in error has escaped, and is not within the control of the court below, either actually, by being in custody, or constructively, by being out on bail. If we affirm the judgment, he is not likely to appear to submit to his sentence. If we reverse it and order a new trial, he will appear or not, as he may consider most for his interest. Under such circumstances, we are not inclined to hear and decide what may prove to be only a moot case.

This cause was docketed here Dec. 29, 1870. In due time a brief was filed on behalf of the plaintiff in error, and the cause has been regularly continued at every term since, no one appearing here in person to represent the plaintiff. At this term we dismissed the writ, on motion of the United States, for want of prosecution, but have since reinstated it on motion of the counsel for the plaintiff in error, who now moves to have it set down for argument. This motion we deny, and order

Page 94 U. S. 98

that unless the plaintiff in error submit himself to the jurisdiction of the court below on or before the first day of our next term, the cause be left off the docket after that time. People v. Genet, 59 N.Y. 80; Leftwich's Case, 20 Gratt. 723; Commonwealth v. Andrews, 97 Mass. 544; see also 31 Me. 592.

Motion to set down the case for argument denied.

Same Parties Smith vs United States Same Subject Education