Roseborough v. People of State of California
| Decision Date | 17 September 1963 |
| Docket Number | No. 18369.,18369. |
| Citation | 322 F.2d 788 |
| Parties | James ROSEBOROUGH, Jr., Appellant, v. The PEOPLE OF the STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Annette L. Rooz, San Francisco, Cal., for appellant.
Stanley Mosk, Atty. Gen. of California, Albert W. Harris, Jr., and Robert R. Granucci, Deputy Attys. Gen., San Francisco, Cal., for appellee.
Before MADDEN, Judge of the Court of Claims, and HAMLEY and BROWNING, Circuit Judges.
James Roseborough, Jr., in custody pursuant to a judgment of a court of the State of California, appeals from an order denying his application for a writ of habeas corpus.
An application for a writ of habeas corpus is the assertion of a right against the person having the applicant in custody. Roseborough is in the custody of E. J. Oberhauser, Superintendent of the California Institution for Men, Chino, California. This official, however, was not named or served as a party in this proceeding, the sole respondent being The People of the State of California.
It follows that, assuming Roseborough is entitled to his release, the district court could not have entered a binding order granting such relief. See Bohm v. Alaska, 9 Cir., 320 F.2d 851.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Matysek v. United States
...below) the wrong party, and the appeal must be dismissed. Cf.: Morehead v. California, 9th Cir., 339 F.2d 170; Roseborough v. California, 322 F.2d 788 (9th Cir. 1963); Bohm v. Alaska, 320 F.2d 851 (9th Cir. 10 I. e., in a case where a taxicab driver was arrested for parking a taxicab in a r......
-
Johnson v. State of Florida, 68-278-Civ-CA.
...of California, 356 F.2d 950 (9th Cir. 1966); Morehead v. State of California, 339 F.2d 170 (9th Cir. 1964); Roseborough v. People of State of California, 322 F.2d 788 (9th Cir. 1963); United States ex rel. Lyle v. Carney, 277 F.Supp. 250 (W.D.Pa.1967); Osborn v. Commonwealth, 277 F.Supp. 75......
-
Morehead v. State of California
...for a writ of habeas corpus is the assertion of a right against the person having the applicant in custody." Roseborough v. California, 322 F.2d 788 (9th Cir. 1963). To the same effect, see, e. g., Bohm v. Alaska, 320 F.2d 851 (9th Cir. 1963). In the case before us, appellant-petitioner has......
-
Osborn v. Commonwealth, Court of Common Pleas, Crawford County
...of California, 356 F.2d 950 (9th Cir. 1966); Morehead v. State of California, 339 F.2d 170 (9th Cir. 1964); Roseborough v. People of State of California, 322 F.2d 788 (9th Cir. 1963); United States ex rel. Lyle v. Carney, 277 F.Supp. 250 (W.D.Pa. November 28, Furthermore, it does not appear......