Ex parte Huston

• Decision Date: 25 July 1922
• Citation: Ex parte Huston, 282 F. 723 (S.D. Fla. 1922)
• Parties: Ex parte HUSTON.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of Florida

282 F. 723

Ex parte HUSTON.

United States District Court, S.D. Florida.

July 25, 1922

Harry W. Reinstine, Sp. Asst. U.S. Dist. Atty., of Jacksonville Fla., for petitioner.

CLAYTON District Judge.

This petition is made by the Assistant United States District Attorney for and on behalf of Robert Huston. The allegations are that Huston is a federal prohibition agent; that he fired a number of shots at a certain Hudson automobile, upon the refusal of the driver thereof to stop the vehicle after the driver had been told that Huston was such agent; that Huston had reason to believe intoxicating liquors were being transported in the automobile in violation of the National Prohibition Act (41 Stat. 305); that thereafter, and because of the shots fired by Huston, several of which went into the automobile, a criminal complaint was filed in the county court of St. Johns county, Fla., sworn to by one J. M Griffin, charging that Huston on the occasion before mentioned did willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously assault J. M. Griffin with intent to commit murder; further, that in consequence of such complaint a warrant was issued for the arrest of Huston, who was accordingly taken into custody on June 17, 1922, and immediately gave bond and was released that subsequently a preliminary hearing was held before the judge of such county court, and Huston was bound over to await the action of the grand jury of that county; that he made the required bond and was released. It is also alleged that this criminal charge is still pending; that Huston is not guilty of the act complained of, and that the act was done in performance of his duties as federal prohibition officer of the United States government; and that Huston was acting by and under authority of the laws of the United States, and was attempting to enforce the National Prohibition Act.

This is literally the language of the petition, with but few and immaterial changes of the text. The petition prays that said criminal cause be removed from the county court of St. Johns county, Fla., into the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of Florida for hearing, and that writ of habeas corpus cum causa issue to that end.

On the hearing of the petition there were cited In re Neagle, 135 U.S. 1, 10 Sup.Ct. 658, 34 L.Ed. 55, and State of Florida v. Bernard J. Tooher et al. The latter was removed to this court, the United States District Court, at Jacksonville, by Judge Call on petition on October 19, 1921. The same was tried (Clayton, Judge) on the charge contained in the state grand jury's indictment. Present at the trial in this court were the state prosecuting attorney, who prosecuted the case, and the witnesses for the state and the defendants in the indictment and their witnesses. A regular and formal trial was had in this court under the Florida law and in accordance with the Florida procedure. A verdict of acquittal was regularly rendered.

Neither of the above cases affords authority in support of this petition. They cannot be any precedent for federal intervention in the instant case. Neagle was a deputy United States marshal.

'The main allegation of this (his) petition was that Neagle, as United States deputy marshal acting under the orders of Marshal Franks and in pursuance of the instructions from the Attorney General of the United States had in consequence of an anticipated attempt at violence on the part of Terry against Hon. Stephen J. Field, a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, been in attendance upon said justice and was sitting by his side at a breakfast table when a murderous assault was made by Terry on Judge Field, and in defense of the life of the judge the homicide was committed for which Neagle was held by Cunningham (the sheriff). The allegation was very distinct that Judge Field was engaged in the...