Joe Wysong, in Error v. The People of the State of California
Cases that cite this one
23 later published cases cite this decision.
- UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Lloyd DIXON, Jr., Appellant (2d Cir. 1976)
- United States v. Theodore J. Isaacs and Otto Kerner, Jr. (7th Cir. 1974)
- Vito Giacalone v. William Lucas, Sheriff (6th Cir. 1971)
- State v. MORETTI (N.J. 1968)
- Spring v. Caldwell (District Court, S.D. Texas 1981)
- Earl Edward Gandy v. State of Alabama (5th Cir. 1978)
- Ortiz v. Suazo (N.M. 1977)
- State Ex Rel. Kennedy v. Lee (Fla. 1973)
- Roe v. Ingraham (District Court, S.D. New York 1973)
- United States v. Dale Edmund Crowder (9th Cir. 1972)
- United States Ex Rel. Parsons v. Adams (United States District Court for the District of Connecticut 1971)
- Ng Pui Yu v. United States (9th Cir. 1965)
- Jesus Padilla Enriquez and Raul Franco v. United States (9th Cir. 1963)
- Andrew James Leonard v. United States (9th Cir. 1963)
- Charles Sachs v. United States (9th Cir. 1960)
- United States v. Jules Gordon (3d Cir. 1957)
- United States v. El Rancho Adolphus Products, Inc. (District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania 1956)
- United States v. Pavoni (United States Court of Military Appeals 1955)
- Schwartz v. United States (9th Cir. 1947)
- Harlan v. Sparks (10th Cir. 1942)
- Shettel v. United States (D.C. Cir. 1940)
- Scheer v. Moody (District Court, D. Montana 1931)
- C. Flanagan & Sons, Inc. v. Carken (Tex. App. 1928)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
Joe WYSONG, plaintiff in error,
v.
The PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
No. 877.
Supreme Court of the United States
April 9, 1928
PER CURIAM.
Upon consideration of the record herein submitted, the court finds that this is not a case in which there is drawn in question the validity of a treaty or statute of the United States and the decision is against its validity; or where is properly drawn in question the validity of a statute of the State of California, on the ground of its being repugnant to the Constitution, treaties, or laws of the United States, and the decision is in favor of its validity. It is, therefore, not a case which, under sec. 237(a) of the Judicial Code, as amended by the Act of February 13, 1925 (43 Stat. 936, 937 (28 USCA § 344)) may be reviewed by this Court on writ of error, and this Court has no jurisdiction thereof under said section. Jett Bros. Distilling Co. v. City of Carrollton, 252 U. S. 1, 5, 6, 40 S. Ct. 255, 64 L. Ed. 421.
Treating the writ of error as a petition for writ of certiorari under sec. 237(c) of the Judicial Code, as amended by the Act of February 13, 1925 (43 Stat. 936, 937), the clerk is directed to issue an order returnable April 30th next against Joe Wysong to show cause, if any there be, by printed return and printed brief, why the petition for certiorari should not be denied for lack of a substantial federal question shown in the record giving this court jurisdiction.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.