Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

CaptaIn Jack, Petitioner

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Apr-15-1889
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/86213

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
130 U.S. 353
Subject
Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

CaptaIn Jack, Petitioner

Excerpt

captain jack, petitioner - 130 u.s. 353 (1889) u.s. supreme court captain jack, petitioner, 130 u.s. 353 (1889) captain jack, petitioner no. 8, original argued march 18, 1889 decided april 15, 1889 130 u.s. 353 original syllabus the facts that the petitioner in this case was sentenced to imprisonment in ohio, and that the offense was committed within a judicial district, instead of an indian reservation, do not take this case out of the decision in gon-shay-ee's case, just decided, ante, 130 u. s. 343 . page 130 u. s. 354 petition for writ of habeas corpus. the case is stated in the opinion. mr. justice miller delivered the opinion of the court. the only distinctions between this case and that of gonshayee, in which the opinion has just been delivered, are: first, that captain jack was sentenced to imprisonment at hard labor in the penitentiary of ohio for thirty years, and the writ must therefore be directed to the keeper of that institution at columbus, in that state; second, that it appears by the record that in the former case the offense was committed on an indian reservation, while in the case of captain jack, the act was done within the judicial district, but not upon such a reservation. we do not consider that these differences have any influence in the decision of the question as to the jurisdiction of the court which tried them both, and that therefore in this case, as in the former, the writ of habeas corpus should issue. writ granted.

Full Judgment

Captain Jack, Petitioner - 130 U.S. 353 (1889)
U.S. Supreme Court Captain Jack, Petitioner, 130 U.S. 353 (1889)

Captain Jack, Petitioner

No. 8, Original

Argued March 18, 1889

Decided April 15, 1889

130 U.S. 353

ORIGINAL

SYLLABUS

The facts that the petitioner in this case was sentenced to imprisonment in Ohio, and that the offense was committed within a judicial district, instead of an Indian reservation, do not take this case out of the decision in Gon-shay-ee's Case, just decided, ante, 130 U. S. 343 .

Page 130 U. S. 354

Petition for writ of habeas corpus. The case is stated in the opinion.

MR. JUSTICE MILLER delivered the opinion of the Court.

The only distinctions between this case and that of Gonshayee, in which the opinion has just been delivered, are:

First, that Captain Jack was sentenced to imprisonment at hard labor in the penitentiary of Ohio for thirty years, and the writ must therefore be directed to the keeper of that institution at Columbus, in that state; second, that it appears by the record that in the former case the offense was committed on an Indian reservation, while in the case of Captain Jack, the act was done within the judicial district, but not upon such a reservation. We do not consider that these differences have any influence in the decision of the question as to the jurisdiction of the court which tried them both, and that therefore in this case, as in the former, the writ of habeas corpus should issue.

Writ granted.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial