US SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

This court will not review the judgment of the state court when it rests not only on federal, but also on nonfederal ground, and the latter are sufficient to sustain it and were necessarily decided.

Whether state officers have power to grant a parole under a state Indeterminate Sentence Act, and under what conditions, are for the state court to finally determine.

The state court having held that, under the applicable statutes, the parole granted to a prisoner was absolutely void and was therefore properly vacated, such ground is sufficient to sustain the judgment, and this Court cannot review it on the asserted federal question that the state officers had vacated the parole in such manner as to violate the prisoner's constitutional rights secured by the Fourteenth Amendment.

Whether a state statute allowing prisoners a reduction for "good time" is part of an Indeterminate Sentence Act is for the state court to determine, and in this case it is a substantial local question on which to rest the judgment of the state court.

Writ of error to review 169 Mich. 606 dismissed.

The facts, which involve the jurisdiction of this Court to review a judgment of the state court which rests upon nonfederal as well as federal grounds, are stated in the opinion.