Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 9 views

    In The Matter of Bernard Goldfine, 282 F.2d 763, 1st Cir. (1960)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The court denied a motion for leave to file a petition for writ of mandamus regarding a criminal case. While the court had doubts about its jurisdiction over the matter, it denied the motion because the petitioner had a clear alternative remedy under a separate statute that provides for psychiatric examination, but the petitioner chose not to pursue that avenue of relief. The court did not view the case as exceptional enough to warrant entertaining the extraordinary writ.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    In The Matter of Bernard Goldfine, 282 F.2d 763, 1st Cir. (1960)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    9 views1 page
    The court denied a motion for leave to file a petition for writ of mandamus regarding a criminal case. While the court had doubts about its jurisdiction over the matter, it denied the motion because the petitioner had a clear alternative remedy under a separate statute that provides for psychiatric examination, but the petitioner chose not to pursue that avenue of relief. The court did not view the case as exceptional enough to warrant entertaining the extraordinary writ.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1960-10-04 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 282 F.2d 763 Docket: 5745

    Original Title

    In the Matter of Bernard Goldfine, 282 F.2d 763, 1st Cir. (1960)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The court denied a motion for leave to file a petition for writ of mandamus regarding a criminal case. While the court had doubts about its jurisdiction over the matter, it denied the motion because the petitioner had a clear alternative remedy under a separate statute that provides for psychiatric examination, but the petitioner chose not to pursue that avenue of relief. The court did not view the case as exceptional enough to warrant entertaining the extraordinary writ.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    9 views1 page

    In The Matter of Bernard Goldfine, 282 F.2d 763, 1st Cir. (1960)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The court denied a motion for leave to file a petition for writ of mandamus regarding a criminal case. While the court had doubts about its jurisdiction over the matter, it denied the motion because the petitioner had a clear alternative remedy under a separate statute that provides for psychiatric examination, but the petitioner chose not to pursue that avenue of relief. The court did not view the case as exceptional enough to warrant entertaining the extraordinary writ.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    282 F.

    2d 763

    In the Matter of Bernard GOLDFINE,


    No. 5745 (Original). Movant.

    United States Court of Appeals First Circuit.


    October 4, 1960.

    Edward Bennett Williams, Vincent J. Fuller, Washington, D. C., and


    Burton L. Williams, Boston, Mass., for movant.
    Elliot L. Richardson, U. S. Atty., Boston, Mass., intervenor, pro se.
    Before WOODBURY, Chief Judge, and HARTIGAN and ALDRICH,
    Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM.

    This court has grave doubts that it has jurisdiction under the all writs section,
    28 U.S.C. 1651(a), to grant this motion for leave to file a petition for writ of
    mandamus for the reason that issuance of the writ would not be in aid of our
    appellate jurisdiction, but it appearing that the petitioner has a clear remedy by
    motion under 18 U.S.C. 4244 of which his counsel at the hearing admitted
    that he was fully aware but chose not to invoke, we do not regard this as an
    exceptional case warranting entertainment of the writ.

    An order will be entered denying the motion.

    You might also like